From the collection of the •7 n z_ m o Prelinger • a v .LJibrary San Francisco, California 2006 &&!&&^&^ STUDIES IN THE MAKING OF CITIZENS $rf^*4$^M£^*WS^$fc^ ^^&*fe^^^3fc^^^ CIVIC ATTITUDES IN AMERICAN SCHOOL TEXTBOOKS THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS, CHICAGO THE BAKER & TAYLOR CO., NEW YORK; THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, LONDON; THE MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA, TOKYO, OSAKA, KYOTO, FUKUOKA, SENDAi; THE COMMERCIAL PRESS, LIMITED, SHANGHAI ^ CIVIC ATTITUDES IN AMERICAN SCHOOL TEXTBOOKS By BESSIE LOUISE PIERCE The University of Chicago THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS CHICAGO • ILLINOIS COPYRIGHT 1930 BY THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 1930 COMPOSED AND PRINTED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, U.S.A. EDITOR'S PREFACE This study of civic education is one of a series of similar analyses in a variety of states. Broadly speaking, the common purpose of these inquiries has been that of examining objectively the systems of civic cohesion in a group of states, of determining the broad trends of civic training in these modern nations, and of indicating possibilities in the further development and con- trol of civic education. In two of these cases, Italy and Russia, striking experiments are now being made in the organization of new types of civic loyalty. Germany, England, the United States, and France present instances of powerful modern states, and the development of types of civic cohesion. Switzerland and Aus- tria-Hungary are employed as examples of the difficulty experi- enced in reconciling a central political allegiance with divergent and conflicting racial and religious elements. The series includes volumes on the following subjects: Soviet Russia, by Samuel N. Harper, Professor of Russian Language and Institutions in the University of Chicago. Great Britain, by John M. Gaus, Professor of Political Science, Uni- versity of Wisconsin. Austria-Hungary, by Oscar Jaszi, formerly of Budapest University, now Professor of Political Science in Oberlin College. The United States, by Carl Brinkmann, Professor of Political Econ- omy in the University of Heidelberg. Italy, by Herbert W. Schneider, Professor of Philosophy in Colum- bia University, and Shepherd M. Clough, of Columbia University. Germany, by Dr. Paul Kosok, New York City. Switzerland, by Robert C. Brooks, Professor of Political Science in Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania. France, by Carleton J. H. Hayes, Professor of History in Columbia University. (This is a part of the Columbia University series of "Studies in Post-war France" and is included here because of its intimate relation to the other volumes in the series.) Civic Attitudes in American School Textbooks, by Bessie L. Pierce, Associate Professor of History in the University of Chicago. vii viii EDITOR'S PREFACE The Duk-Duks, by Elizabeth Weber, Instructor of Political Science, Hunter College, New York City. Comparative Civic Education, by Charles E. Merriam, Professor of Political Science in the University of Chicago. Wide latitude has been given and taken by the individual collaborators in this study, with the understanding, however, (1) that as a minimum there would be included in each volume an examination of the social bases of political cohesion and (2) that the various mechanisms of civic education would be adequately discussed. There is inevitably a wide variation in point of view, method of approach, and in execution of the project. Investi- gators differ widely in aptitude, experience, and environment. Of the various investigators the question may be asked: What part do the social groupings play in the spirit of the state? What is the attitude of the economic groups which for this purpose may be considered under certain large heads, as the attitude of the business element, of the agricultural group, or of labor? What is the relation of the racial groups toward the political group whose solidarity is in question? Do they tend to integrate or disintegrate the state? What is the position of the religious factors in the given society, the Catholic, the Protestant, the Jewish? How are they concerned in loyalty toward the political unit? What is the place of the regional groupings in the politi- cal unit? Do they develop special tendencies alone or in company with other types of groupings already mentioned? What is the relation of these competing loyalties to each other? It cannot be assumed that any of these groups have a special attraction or aversion toward government in general; and the analysis is not conducted with any view of establishing a uni- formity of interest or attachment in any type of group, but rather of indicating the social composition of the existing politi- cal units and authorities. It may well be questioned whether there is any abstract loyalty, political or otherwise. These politi- cal loyalties are determined by concrete interests, modified by survivals that no longer fit the case and by aspirations not yet realized. The cohesion is a resultant of conflicting forces, or a balance of existing counterweights, a factor of the situation. EDITOR'S PREFACE ix All these factors may change and the balance may be the same, or one may change slightly and the whole balance may be over- thrown. It is the integration of interests that counts, not the special form or character of any one of them. Among the mechanisms of civic education which it is hoped to analyze are the schools, the role of governmental services and officials, the place of the political parties, and the function of special patriotic organizations ; or, from another point of view, the use of traditions in building up civic cohesion, the place of political symbolism, the relation of language, literature, and the press to civic education, the position occupied by locality in the construction of a political loyalty ; and, finally, it is hoped that an effective analysis may be made of competing group loyal- ties rivaling the state either within or without. In these groups there is much overlapping. It would be pos- sible to apply any one or all of the last-named categories to any or all of the first. Thus the formal school system made and does utilize language and literature, or symbolism, or love of locality, or make use of important traditions. Symbolism and traditions may and do overlap — in fact, must if they are to serve their pur- pose; while love of locality and language may be and are inter- woven most intimately. Intricate and difficult of comprehension as some of these pat- terns are, they lie at the basis of power; and control systems, however crude, must constantly be employed and invented to deal with these situations. The device may be as simple as an ancient symbol or as complicated as a formal system of school training, but in one form or other these mechanisms of cohesion are con- stantly maintained. In the various states examined, these devices will be traced and compared. The result will by no means attain the dignity of exact measurement but will supply a rough tracing of outlines of types and patterns in different cities. It is hoped, however, that these outlines will be sufficiently clear to set forth some of the main situations arising in the process of political control and to raise important questions regarding the further develop- ment of civic education. x EDITOR'S PREFACE It may be suggested that the process by which political co- hesion is produced must always be considered with reference to other loyalties toward other groups in the same society. Many of the devices here described are common to a number of com- peting groups and can be more clearly seen in their relation to each other, working in co-operation or competition, as the situ- ation may be. The attitude of the ecclesiastical group or the economic group, or the racial or cultural group, or any of them, profoundly influences the nature and effect of the state's attempt to solidify political loyalty; and the picture is complete only when all the concurrent or relevant factors are envisaged. These devices are not always consciously employed although they are spoken of here as if they were. It often happens that these instrumentalities are used without the conscious plan of anyone in authority. In this sense it might be better to say that these techniques are found rather than willed. At any rate, they exist and are operating. These eight or nine techniques are only rough schedules or classifications of broad types of cohesive influences. They are not presented as accurate analyses of the psychology of learn- ing or teaching the cohesive process of political adherence. They presuppose analysis of objectives which has not been made, and they presuppose an orderly study of the means of applying objectives; and this also has not been worked out in any of the states under consideration. This study of Civic Attitudes in American School Textbooks is based upon Dr. Pierce's examination of about 400 texts in com- mon use. These volumes have been carefully analyzed with a view to ascertaining significant attitudes toward important phases of civic life in America. In view of the large place held by schools and textbooks in the civic education of modern states, this in- quiry should prove useful in revealing some of the actualities and some of the possibilities in the special phase of the process of political education. Dr. Pierce's study will be followed by a full discussion of the Civic Education in the United States now in preparation by Professor Carl Brinkman, of Heidelberg Uni- versity, Heidelberg, Germany. AUTHOR'S PREFACE In American educational practice of the present, the two chief agencies of instruction in subject matter are the teacher and the textbook. To call attention to the importance of the latter is both needless and commonplace, and to decry its influence in the hands of a good teacher is beside the point, for in many cases it falls into the hands of a poorly prepared teacher and there- fore must have considerable weight in fashioning patterns of thought in the child. This study deals with the content of textbooks in history, civics or citizenship, sociology, and economics sometimes called "problems of democracy," geography, reading, music, and foreign language commonly found in the elementary grades and in the junior and senior high school, selected from lists of state adop- tions of prescribed, recommended, and approved books, as well as those chosen by administrators of city systems. Although it does not contain all textbooks which form the basis of instruction in these fields, it is a safe assertion that it has included those most frequently found in the schools. Superintendents of public instruction in all states and many superintendents of city sys- tems were asked to submit the list of books used in the schools under their direction. The extent to which each book was used is not known. The study includes 97 histories, 67 books in civic, sociological, and economic problems, 45 geographies, 109 readers, 10 French books, 4 textbooks in Italian, 7 in Spanish, and 50 music-books. Besides these, sixty-three courses of study, or syl- labi, published by state departments of public instruction and typical city systems were read. The French books were chosen from Van Home's list of the most commonly used books in this subject for high schools. In addition to the books appearing in the lists mentioned, some published since these lists were issued were also scrutinized, since later they may be included among the books approved for use. xi xii AUTHOR'S PREFACE All books were surveyed to discover the civic attitudes which might be gained by a pupil who read them. It was the purpose of the study to ascertain what reactions might be engendered to- ward peoples, policies, and customs of other lands, to gather what other peoples think of the United States, and to find out what attitudes might be developed in the American boy or girl reading these books. The characteristics and achievements of the American, his relationship to his fellow-man, and his duty toward his country were considered. In other words, from a study of textbooks frequently found in the schools, what opinions can American boys and girls of the present form concerning their own country and of other countries? What makes up the warp and woof of their reactions to civic situations ? As touching upon the problem in general, the influence of the lawmaking bodies of our commonwealths in determining the character of the curricu- lum has also been treated. Possibly the conclusions reached in the following chapters might be slightly different from those set down if another in- vestigator had performed the same task, but in the main they undoubtedly would be the same. To advocate what should be the content of textbooks does not fall within the confines of this study, for it is designed to be purely pathological and objective. For this reason quotations often chosen as representative of the thought in other books, as well as of the textbook from which they are extracted, appear frequently. Aside from the study of Charles Altschul in 1917 dealing with the American Revolution in school histories and the work of Don- ald A. Taft in comparing textbooks of different countries touch- ing the same event, little has been done in the United States to determine the character of civic instruction as derived from text- books. In Europe, several studies have been made in a similar vein, although not identical in character. Among the best known are Prudhommeaus' Enquete sur les limes scolaires d'apres- guerre, published in 1925 by the Dotation Carnegie pour la Paix Internationale ; the Report on Nationalism in History Textbooks, prepared and compiled by the Working Committee of a Special Commission on Education (Stockholm) ; Jonathan F. Scott's AUTHOR'S PREFACE xiii analysis of textbooks published over the title of The Menace of Nationalism in Education; Carlton J. H. Hayes's study in his France: A Nation of Patriots; and Mark Starr's Lies and Hate in Education. In the preparation of this volume I am indebted to many publishers of textbooks for their generosity in providing copies of their publications. To them I would here express my appreci- ation. My personal thanks are also due to Professor Charles E. Merriam, of the University of Chicago, for his suggestions and direction. T> T T> 1>. .Li. 1 . TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I. TEXTBOOKS IN HISTORY CHAPTER PAGE I. SPAIN AND THE UNITED STATES IN HISTORY TEXTBOOKS 3 II. ENGLAND AND AMERICA ...... . . . 9 III. FRANCE IN UNITED STATES HISTORY TEXTBOOKS 48 IV. GERMANY IN AMERICAN HISTORY TEXTBOOKS . . ; 55 V. THE RELATION OF THE UNITED STATES TO COUNTRIES OF THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE . . . . . . . 68 VI. RUSSIA IN UNITED STATES HISTORY TEXTBOOKS . . 77 VII. COUNTRIES OF THE FAR EAST IN AMERICAN HISTORIES 80 VIII. RACIAL ELEMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES .... 84 IX. THE DEPENDENCIES OF THE UNITED STATES ... 93 X. THE FOREIGN POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES . . . 100 XI. POLITICAL CONCEPTS 102 XII. THE AMERICAN: His ACHIEVEMENTS, IDEALS, AND COUNTRY . . ... . 106 XIII. INTERNATIONAL ATTITUDES IN SOME EUROPEAN HIS- TORY TEXTBOOKS 131 PART II. TEXTBOOKS IN CIVICS, IN SOCIOLOGY, IN ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL PROBLEMS XIV. THE AMERICAN CITIZEN: His RIGHTS AND DUTIES . 139 XV. THE AMERICAN AND OTHER PEOPLES . . . . .151 XVI. THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF AMERICA .... . . 167 PART III. TEXTBOOKS IN GEOGRAPHY XVII. THE UNITED STATES AND PEOPLES OF OTHER COUN- TRIES . . ... . . ....... 175 XVIII. THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES . '. . 188 XV xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS PART IV. READERS CHAPTER PAGE XIX. THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER NATIONS .... 193 XX. THE AMERICAN AND His COUNTRY 207 PART V. TEXTBOOKS IN MUSIC AND FOREIGN LANGUAGE XXI. Music XXII. FOREIGN LANGUAGE PART VI. OFFICIAL POLICIES XXIII. LAWS AFFECTING Civic INSTRUCTION 229 XXIV. COURSES OF STUDY . 242 CONCLUSION . 253 LIST OF BOOKS ANALYZED ; . »' . 257 INDEX . 285 PART I TEXTBOOKS IN HISTORY CHAPTER I SPAIN AND THE UNITED STATES IN HISTORY TEXTBOOKS The year 1492 marks the beginning of contacts of the pupil of American history with world-events and peoples. His study of the period of the exploration of America introduces him to daring, "harsh," and "cruel" Spanish adventurers searching for gold in the New World, men of avarice and mere soldiers of fortune.1 They were "men of primitive character," asserts The Story of Our American People. "That is to say they acted with little thought. Their emotions were unusually selfish and knew small guidance or control. Their hates were fierce and brutal. Their trust in romance was extravagant. Their desires were for obvious things, riches, power, fame."2 In their relations with the natives, the Spaniards are described as especially harsh and cruel, although contributing to the Indians "many useful les- sons."3 An opposite point of view is expressed by a history for Cath- olic schools, which declares: "To Spain is due the discovery of the New World ; she it was who opened it up to civilization. Her teachers taught the Spanish language and Christian faith to thousands of aborigines." Her "policy toward the Indians was Charming, A Students' History of the United States, p. 30; Forman, Advanced American History, p. 13; McLaughlin, History of the American Nation, p. 15. These are typical examples. Most histories paint the Spanish in this way. 2 Charles Home, The Story of Our American People, I, 44. The history indorsed by the American Legion designed for seventh or eighth grade. This is taken from the "advance" edition. It should be said, however, that this textbook is probably not widely used at the present. Muzzey, in his An American History, mentions their spirit of romance as well as mis- sionary zeal (p. 13). See also his History of the American People, p. 25. Muzzey's textbook has wide use. 3Burnham, The Making of Our Country, p. 13. This is a textbook for junior high school. 3 4 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS one of humanity, justice, education and moral suasion," although "individual Spaniards broke the strict law of their country and treated the Indians with the utmost cruelty."4 Few authors find much in the Spaniard to commend. Channing and Burnham mention their "energy" and the "hardships" en- countered in the daring exploit of exploring a new world. Yet their colonial system is described as entirely lacking religious and political freedom.5 Undoubtedly the incident which will most permanently im- press itself upon the pupil is that of the cruelty of Menendez to Ribaut, whose "settlement was a double defiance both of their country and of their religion." In colorful language are chron- icled Menendez' approach to Florida and the scattering of the French fleet by a hurricane, welcomed by the Spaniards as "the direct protection of Providence." Home writes in The Story of Our American People, While the great storm still raged, Menendez and a company of his soldiers struggled secretly northward against its fury, and sud- denly in the midst of the tempest attacked the French settlement Every male prisoner was hanged, and the bodies were left with a notice beside them that they had been slain "not as Frenchmen but as heretics." Then Menendez returned in triumph to St. Augustine; and when the wretched survivors of Ribaut's wrecked fleet were found there upon the beach, they also were slain. Only at the last did the stern Spaniard's fierceness fail him. He spared some few of the last men along with the women and children The Spanish king promptly approved Menendez' slaughter of the captured "heretics," criticized him only for sparing the survivors and condemned these to become "galley slaves."6 Although not couched in such stirring language as the passage quoted, other histories at present in use in the schools discuss the attack of Menendez, who is generally described as cruel and 4 The Franciscan Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration, A History of the United States for Catholic Schools, pp. 42-43. Muzzey, An American History, notes the missionary spirit of the early Spanish. See p. 13. Thus it is seen that it is mentioned also by others than Catholic authors. B Channing, op. cit.; Burnham, op. cit., p. 14. 8 Home, op cit., pp. 83-84. SPAIN AND THE UNITED STATES 5 merciless7 and who "butchered in cold blood" the Huguenot set- tlement.8 Children reading the History of the United States for Catho- lic Schools by Charles H. McCarthy will get a different impres- sion of the Menendez-Ribaut episode. In a footnote to the gen- eral discussion in which none of the details appear lurid, Dr. McCarthy says: This affair, bad enough in any view, is misrepresented in some books, where it is said that the French, who were nearly all Protes- tants, were massacred by the Spaniards on account of their religion. There is no doubt that the religion of the French settlers added to the anger of the Spaniards, but it must also be remembered that the Spaniards first knew their neighbors as pirates. The French Huguenots were just as cruel as Spanish Catholics. About ten years before, 1555, Jacques de Sorie captured the castle at Havana and though he promised quarter to its garrison, put all his prisoners to the sword. He then burned churches and mutilated images.9 The later exploits of the Spanish are described in equally uncomplimentary terms in textbooks found particularly in Prot- estant schools. Neither the policy of Spain in Louisiana as it affected the West10 nor Spanish colonial policy is discussed in a manner which will tend to change the attitude already gained by the pupil. Thompson, in his History of the People of the United States, for example, says: "The Spanish colonies in America were long suffering. The colonial policy of Great Brit- ain, on account of which the United States fought and won its independence, was generous in comparison with the colonial policy of Spain." Evans, in The Essential Facts in American History, mentions the "iron hand of tyranny and extortion" used by Spain in her American colonies, inhabited by a people whom Garner and Henson describe as "down-trodden."1 7 Forman, op. cit., p. 17; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 231; Thomp- son, A History of the United States, p. 24. 8Latane, A History of the United States, pp. 13-14. 9 McCarthy, The History of the United States for Catholic Schools, p. 38. 10 Burnham, op. cit.} p. 222. "Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 251; Evans, The Essential Facts in American History, p. 279; Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, p. 278. 6 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS Nida points out in The Dawn of American History in Europe: The Spanish were earliest upon our shores, but they wasted their time and resources in wild searches for gold, until they lost control of the sea. They did not know the importance of honest labor, nor did they appreciate the value of thinking men in politics or religion. They made a mistake in denying liberty of thought to their people. Every prosperous nation must have workers and thinkers, but Spain had neither. The Spanish rulers and nobles claimed to have Teu- tonic blood in their veins, but they had lost the spirit of liberty and all other virtues of the Teutons. Since they misunderstood their own people and misgoverned their own country, it is no wonder they failed in the struggle for possession of America.12 After the passage of four centuries, the same characteristics still seem a part of Spanish rule. It was the tyranny and selfish- ness of Spain's colonial policy which are said to have "compelled" the American government "in the interests of humanity" to in- tervene, in 1898, in the revolt of Cuba.13 Thompson declares in the History of the People of the United States: The peoples of the United States could not be indifferent to the conditions in Cuba. The island lies but a little more than a hundred miles from Florida. So long as it was held by a foreign power, it might in time of war, become a source of danger as a base for the enemy's operations. But over and above these considerations, the American people had a genuine sympathy for the Cubans in their struggle for liberty and an abhorrence for the Spanish mode of warfare,14 a system full of "barbarities" and "inhuman methods."15 The archtraitor in the Spanish-Cuban struggle is General Weyler, "a fiercely resolute general" known to Cubans as "the 12 Nida, The Dawn of American History in Europe, p. 365. "Mace, School History of the United States, p. 448. See also Guitteau, op. cit., pp. 525, 526; Tryon and Lingley, The American People and Nation, p. 580; Barker, Webb, and Dodd, The Growth of a Nation, p. 608; Muzzey, The American People, p. 509; and others. 14 Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 438. Also men- tioned, among others, by Tryon and Lingley, and Muzzey. 15Woodburn and Moran, Elementary American History and Government, p. 413; Gordy, History of the United States, p. 423. SPAIN AND THE UNITED STATES 7 butcher,"16 whose reconcentrados led Americans to send Cubans food and medical aid and to condemn such "horrible conditions" in the platforms of both great political parties in 1896.17 [Thus] after thirty years of peace [declares Daffan], the United States again engaged in war from as high a motive as can bring about war. Not to acquire new territory, not to humiliate a rival nation, not to avenge a wrong done to herself, this war was begun to put an end to human oppression and suffering.18 Substantially all of the histories used in the schools present the situation in much the same manner.19 As a contributory factor in American interest in Cuba the spur of economic contacts is discussed by a few authors. Mc- Carthy, for instance, in his History of the United States for Catholic Schools, minimizes the humanitarian object of the Unit- ed States and declares that "our country was interested in Cuba because of its situation just off our shores, and later be- cause our people had invested their money in its mines, railroads and plantations."2 Another writer confesses that the constant warfare between Spain and Cuba interfered greatly with our commerce with the 16 Home, op. cit., II, 350; Fite, History of the United States, p. 497. "McMaster, A School History of the United States, pp. 473-74; Muzzey, An American History, p. 452, and Muzzey, History of the American People, p. 506. 18 Daffan, History of the United States, p. 531. 19 See, for instance, Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 544; Channing, A Students' History of the United States, pp. 549-50; Channing, Elements of United States History, pp. 327-28; Eggleston, First Book in American History, p. 186; Estill, Beginner's History of Our Country^ p. 280; Fite, The United States, p. 395; Fite, History of the United States, p. 497; Forman, op. cit., p. 521; Garner and Henson, op cit., pp. 526-27; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, History of the United States, pp. 426-27; Halleck, History of Our Country,, pp. 434-35; Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, p. 463; Long, America, p. 453; McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 575; Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States, pp. 367-68; Thompson, First Book in United States History, pp. 357-58; West and West, The Story of Our Country, pp. 458-59; White, Beginner's History of the United States, pp. 303-4. 20 McCarthy, op. cit., p. 435. See also, for similar point of view, Tryon and Lingley, op. cit., p. 579; Muzzey, History of the American People, pp. 505-6. 8 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS islands, and that the Cuban revolt was "too much like a house on fire in the neighborhood" for Americans to ignore it.21 A consistent sympathy on the part of this country in the efforts of oppressed people to gain their freedom and indepen- dence is noted by McLaughlin and Beard.22 Channing, with others, shows how the interest of the United States in Cuba as a possession had extended over many years, and that "its com- mand of the Caribbean Sea makes American control of it almost a military necessity."21 Such a point of view is rarely expressed in the histories of elementary school level, but appears occasion- ally in some of the senior high school textbooks. The attitude which European nations took toward American intervention in Cuba is discussed particularly by books written since the World War, in which is set forth the sympathetic re- sponse of England in contrast with the reactions of other Euro- pean powers. Most of the European nations sided with Spain and thought the United States should mind her own business [says Halleck]. Con- tinental newspapers called the war "an act of international piracy without shadow of justice." The great English papers, with one ex- ception, took the side of the United States. When London heard of the declaration of war, the Stars and Stripes were displayed in every part of the city. Crowds of Englishmen went to the American Embassy in London and cheered. There had been talk of foreign' intervention to stop the war, but when Great Britain's attitude became known, such talk ceased.2* Thus was fought by Americans the "people's war"25 against the "weak nation" Spain,26 for whom it was "folly" to try "to measure swords with the virile, unmeasured power of the United States."27 21 Robbins, School History of the American People, p. 462. 22 McLaughlin, op. cit.} p. 515; Beard, History of the United States, p. 487. 23 Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 548; Beard, op. cit., pp. 485-89; Hulbert, United States History, p. 485. 24 Halleck, op. cit., pp. 435-36. Among others the American Legion history expresses the same sentiment. 25 Home, op. cit., II, 350. 28Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, p. 481. 27 Ibid. CHAPTER II ENGLAND AND AMERICA Anglo-American relations as set forth in our school histories fall naturally into distinct periods. The first discusses the open- ing up of English settlements ; the second deals with the Revolu- tionary epoch, followed by events leading to the War of 1812; the fourth is devoted to a treatment of relations between the two countries after the Treaty of Ghent through the Civil War and the Spanish- American War to 1917 ; and the last deals with our relations with England as her ally in the World War. Aside from the friendship of England in 1898 recorded by some histori- ans, relations up to 1917 are discussed, on the whole, in such a way that Anglo-American concord will not be promoted. Although Drake, Gilbert, Raleigh, and other English explor- ers are surrounded with a romantic atmosphere, their exploits are not narrated in a way to kindle antagonisms in the reader as in the case of Spanish adventurers. Their story merely pre- pares the way for the coming of English colonists to America. Jamestown may be passed by with little comment for the settle- ment of the Pilgrims who "had left England because they were not permitted to worship God as they wished" since "the English law was unjust."1 According to A School History of the United States,2 There has seldom been a gentler and kinder group of people than the Pilgrims. They appear to have had good will toward all men, even toward the cruel king from whom they had fled and toward the savages of the forests. They valued so highly the freedom to worship God in their own way that they would not refuse the same freedom to others. Their little republic — for so we may describe 1 Coe, Founders of Our Country, p. 154; Baldwin, The Story of Liberty, p. 63. The latter may be classified also as a reader. 2 Stephenson, A School History of the United States, p. 50. "A God- fearing and industrious people," according to Hart, New American History, p. 46. 9 10 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS their settlement — was a land of peace and good will, [which had] a large influence in shaping the character of our people.3 The Puritans, too, came to escape "persecution on account of religion." At the time Winthrop and his followers came to Amer- ica, Puritans are said to have been "suffering imprisonment, and having their ears cropped and their noses slit on account of their religious opinions."4 According to historians, political tyranny as well as religious persecution played a part in the Puritan exodus.5 There is practically no mention of an economic motive. Following the settlement of the colonies, textbook writers, on the whole, embark chiefly upon a discussion of such factors in colonial life as social and economic development and forms of local government. Even the Andros episode provokes slight un- pleasantness, although described by one author as making "a short end of the liberty which the Puritans had built up by labor and sacrifice."6 In the struggles between France and England during the eighteenth century, the participation of the colonists in America is applauded. Regardless, however, of the aid given, the pupil is told that in 1748 France and Britain traded with one another for fragments of the widespread empire of each. Britain gave back Louisburg in ex- change for advantages in other lands. This careless neglect of America's interests, this indifference to her great triumph, was a cruel blow to all our people, especially the New Englanders. It taught them how little they could trust to Britain's protection.7 3 Fish, History of America, p. 22. 4Forman, Advanced American History, p. 39. See also Thompson, A History of the People of the United States, p. 37. 8Fite, History of the United States, p. 40; Halleck, History of Our Country, p. 79; Forman, op. cit., p. 39; McMaster, A School History of the United States, p. 47; Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States, p. 42; O'Hara, A History of the United States, p. 72; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 77. 6 Long, America, pp. 123-24. 7 Home, The Story of Our American People, I, 299, Long's treatment of the episode is much the same. See Long, op. cit., pp. 134-35. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 11 Indeed, the return of Louisburg to France is said to have caused the colonists "chagrin" because they had lost "their hard- earned prize,"8 and, according to the authors of a history for Catholic schools, "was one of the first events which led the Eng- lish colonies to see that American affairs should be settled on this side of the Atlantic and not by a power thousands of miles • «Q away. Others mention the return of Louisburg to France in a man- ner to create the impression that the colonists were treated un- justly.10 Hulbert, in his discussion of the American phases of the European wars, goes so far as to say that the capture of posts by the colonists was of "so little consequence" to the "Mother Bear (England)" that when "truces were made with France, the gains in America were usually sacrificed. Thus the colonists had the cold truth thrust home upon them ' that if they stood between the Mother Country and her imperial ambitions they would be brushed aside."11 The classic example of the "blundering tragedies" of England is Braddock's defeat in the French and Indian War, "typical of several others that stunned or enraged our colonies, and that must have disheartened any people less resolute to make an end of the French menace to liberty."12 For this "disaster" Brad- dock, "obstinate and arrogant, with a noisy contempt for every- 8 Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, p. 99. See also Burnham, The Making of Our Country, p. 98. 9 The Franciscan Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration, A History of the United States for Catholic Schools, p. 137. 10Channing, Elements of United States History, p. 95; Evans, The Essen- tial Facts of American History, p. 138; Lawler, Essentials of American History, p. 134; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, A History of the United States for Schools, p. 115; McMaster, op. cit., p. 81; Mace, School History of the United States, p. 124; Muzzey, An American History, p. 80; Robbins, School History of the American People, p. 90. "Hulbert, United States History, p. 103. The "disappointment" of the colonists is mentioned by some writers such as O'Hara, Thompson, Thwaites and Kendall, and Mace and Bogardus: O'Hara, op. cit., p. 109; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 100; Thompson, op. cit., p. 90; Thwaites and Kendall, A History of the United States, p. 124. 12 Long, op. cit., p. 138. 12 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS thing colonial," some hold accountable.13 Even those authors who attribute bravery to Braddock, in some cases qualify their statements by describing him as "haughty and self-willed"14 and "a bigot to military rules."15 On the other hand, Channing, for instance, does not indulge in adjectives uncomplimentary to Braddock, but describes the defeat as follows : It happened, therefore, when Braddock and his men had crossed the last river, and had gained a point within a few miles of Fort Duquesne, that they suddenly found themselves assailed in front and on either side by Indians and white men, fighting wilderness fashion from behind trees and anything else that offered protection. This was a kind of warfare to which Braddock and his English troops were entirely unaccustomed. They were brave and so was he, but he could think of no better way to meet this danger than to arrange his men in line and advance to the attack exactly as if he had been fighting regular French soldiers on an open battlefield of Europe. Washington and the Virginians did what they could to save the day by fighting the Indians and French in their own manner, but this proved to be impossible. Braddock was mortally wounded, retreat was ordered, and the defeated soldiers ran away, each man for him- self as fast as he could go.16 Any protection given the colonists by England in the inter- colonial struggles is mentioned rarely. Forman, however, in his treatment of the French and Indian War, points out that "it was England and not the colonies that offered determined and successful resistance to France."17 Doubtless the narration of the Franco-English struggles as 13 Home, op. cit., I, 306. See also Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, p. 169; Burnham, op. cit., pp. 101-2. "Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, p. 108. See also Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 105; Evans, op. cit., p. 141. MGuitteau, Our United States, p. 117. See also Gordy, History, of the United States, p. 94; Woodburn and Moran, Elementary American History and Government, p. -97. 16 Channing, op. cit., p. 99. See also Estill, The Beginner's History of Our Country, pp. 149-50; Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, p. 128; Forman, op. cit., p. 95. 17 Forman, op. cit., p. 64. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 13 carried on in America, in themselves, would kindle little antag- onism to England if they were the only instances of hostility toward the mother-country. But others follow. And these lead directly to the Revolutionary War, the episode in which the greatest animosity toward any country is evinced, with the pos- sible exception of some discussions of Germany in the World War. To the pupil reading Elson's United States: Its Past and Present it is pointed out that, following the French and Indian War, there were some forces working in the direction of separation. Some of the American people were not English — the Dutch, Irish, Ger- mans, and others — and these did not inherit a filial love of the mother- land; and the great majority of English descent had been born on this side of the water and had never seen England. Furthermore, the colonists had long chafed under the irritating Navigation Laws and the transportation to the colonies of many criminals from the British prisons. These things did not show the fond affection of a parent for a child; but they were not enough to bring about a separation. That was brought about by a series of official blunders covering a dozen years.18 In this fashion the child is prepared for the approach of the American Revolution, the result of "the unjust treatment of England" upon colonists who "loved old England, the land of their fathers, and were proud of their kinship with her." The reader is shown how the mother-country, contributing to colonial unrest, "often appointed worthless men .... who despised the people they ruled," and how there were enacted "English laws" which were "aimed to make English merchants and traders richer, but which, at the same time, kept the Americans poor."19 Even West and Muzzey, recently attacked as "unpatriotic" and "pro-English" by organizations such as the Sons of the American Revolution and by Commissioner of Accounts Hirsh- field, in his report on history textbooks used in the New York 18 Elson, op. cit., pp. 119-20. 19Estill, op. cit., pp. 155-56. See also Latan6, History of the United States, pp. 92-93; Evans, op. cit., pp. 176-77; Barnes, Short American History, p. 6. 14 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS City schools,20 do not give England a clean bill of health in her mercantile policy. Muzzey points out that "the colonies were naturally aggrieved at such treatment," characterizing the laws as "ugly" and "odious."2 By West, the English laws of 1696, 1732, and 1750 are de- scribed as "selfish and sinister." They must have become bitterly oppressive ere long, had the col- onists continued under English rule; and at the time they fully deserved the condemnation visited upon them by the great English economist, Adam Smith: "These prohibitions are only impertinent badges of slavery, imposed upon [the colonies] without sufficient reason by the groundless jealousy of the manufactures of the mother country."22 The Sugar Act of 1733, according to Professor West, was "an- other source of justifiable irritation."23 Evasion of the laws of England by the colonists is frequently mentioned, although in such a way that colonial honor is not impugned. Had the Molasses Act been strictly enforced, the prosperity of New England would have been at an end. But smuggling was carried on so generally that the revenue laws were practically nullified; the customs officers and even the royal governors connived at the practice The strict enforcement of these acts threatened the commercial prosperity of the colonies ; and thus the real issue between them and Great Britain became one of home rule — whether the col- onies were to be allowed to map out their own destinies, or whether they were to be held in permanent tutelage to the British govern- ment.2* Gordy declares in his History of the United States: The Sugar Act would greatly injure New England trade with the West Indies, and this trade was one of the principal sources of 20 See Bessie Louise Pierce, Public Opinion and the Teaching of History in the United States (New York, 1926), pp. 221-22, 253-58, 283 ff. 21 Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 92, 93. 22 West, History of the American People, pp. 148-49. The italics are in the textbook. 23 Ibid., p. 149. See also Gordy, op. cit., pp. 122-23. These are typical. ^Guitteau, The History of the United States, p. 113. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 15 wealth to New England merchants. Threatened with financial ruin, they had to choose between that and smuggling. Believing the law was an unjust interference with their mutual rights, they chose smug- gling, and for a time England allowed it to pass unnoticed.25 [On the whole, however] colonists proved themselves a law-abiding folk until Parliament, seeking more money to meet growing expenses, decided to revive the old navigation acts. Even then it was not so much the acts .... as the outrageous method of enforcing them which bred a spirit of rebellion.26 Instances might be multiplied to show that, although smug- glers, the colonists were criminal only in the literal interpreta- tion of the law. In general, the pupil would not condemn, but would probably uphold the colonists in an evasion of a law painted as unjust and unwise.27 Some authors point out that the Navigation laws and Acts of Trade were not entirely harmful to colonial industry. McLaugh- lin, Guitteau, Beard and Bagley, Bourne and Benton, Channing, Fite, James and Sanford, West, and others not only indicate causes for colonial resentment, but also show that "the enumer- ated commodities, which could be shipped only to Great Brit- ain, were given a preference in that market over similar com- modities from other countries."28 Few authors speak so frankly as Garner and Henson: It was not, however, until the French and Indian War that the ministry seemed to realize the seriousness of colonial smuggling. So disloyal, at that time, were many of the New Englanders, that al- though the mother country and the colonists themselves were en- ^Gordy, op. cit., p. 123. 26 Long, op. cit., p. 157. 27 See West, The jStory of Our Country, p. 134; Halleck, op. cit., p. 167; Burnham, op. cit., pp. 58-59; Evans, op. cit., p. 177; Home, op. cit., I, 282; Fish, op. cit., pp. 120-21 ; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 91 ; Fite, op. cit., p. 98. 28 McLaughlin, History of the American Nation, p. 137; Guitteau, The History of the United States, p. 113; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 130; Beard and Bagley, The History of the American People, p. 127; Bourne and Benton, op. cit., p. 118; Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 112; James and Sanford, American History, p. 142; West, History of the American People, p. 185. Quotation from Fite, op. cit., p. 99. 16 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS gaged in a life and death struggle with the French in America, they persisted in smuggling supplies to New France.29 Discussions concerning the Proclamation Line of 1763, the Writs of Assistance, the insistence of James Otis upon the politi- cal belief that "a man's house is his castle," the Stamp Act, and succeeding events present the facts from a colonial point of view, although endeavoring in many instances to set forth the British side. A comparison of textbooks now in use with those of a generation ago reveals in the books of the present an at- tempt to present two sides of the story. Although British co- lonial policy is said to have been an "unwise course" to which the colonists "naturally"30 objected, it is generally made clear that, on the whole, British colonial government was better than that of other countries of the time.31 Yet few writers leave doubts as to the folly of the colonial policy adopted, although they may present reasons for it. As in Long's America, the tend- ency is to show that the mother-country's policy was unjust, selfish, and ill-advised. England's political mistake was to regard colonies as dependencies ; her economic mistake was to regard them as a mere source of profit to herself. The mercantile theory, then held by all nations, alleged that colonies must make money for Englishmen or Spaniards who stayed at home and invested their funds in ships or goods for co- lonial trade. American colonists had a different idea. Following a vision of liberty, they came here not to benefit English commerce but to better themselves. They came first in Elizabethan days, with the Elizabethan spirit of adventure, of pride of race and nation; and they kept their pride while England submitted to the tricky despotism of Charles II 29 Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 140. 30 Thompson, First Book in United States History, pp. 188-89. See also Barnes, American History for Orammer Grades, p. 183; Lawler, op. cit., p. 170; Fish, op. cit., p. 132; Home, The Story of Our American People, I, 323; Long, op. cit., p. 157; Elson, op. cit., p. 121. 31 See, for example, Franciscan Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration, A History of the United States, p. 168; Hulbert, op. cit., p. 121; Bourne and Benton, op. cit., p. 118; Thompson, A History of the People of the United States, p. 108; Beard, History of the United States, p. 69; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 57; West, History of the American People, p. 115. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 17 or the stupid despotism of George III. They had more of the old free English spirit than could be found in England itself. They represented the empire, and were loyal to it; but with all their hearts they loved this land, its wideness, its beauty, its promise that here would Liberty dwell with their children forever; and it became holy in their eyes when they laid their dead to rest beneath its soil. To them America meant all that is expressed in the two dearest words in our language, "home" and "country." England thought of America as "the colonies," places to hunt for furs or grow tobacco for the benefit of British commerce, and made laws to that effect. In many of the textbooks in most common use a clear dis- tinction is drawn between the political theories of the colonists regarding representation and those held in England. These writ- ers obviously endeavor to point out that a cause for misunder- standing sprang out of two different schools of political thought as to representative government. The phrase "no taxation without representation" was familiar to all sections of the British people, but it conveyed very different ideas to those living in Great Britain and to their kinsfolk in the colonies. The British Parliament was composed of two houses, — the Peers, comprising hereditary nobles and the bishops, and the House of Com- mons. The members of the latter body were elected, and were sup- posed to represent all classes of people. Some of the electoral dis- tricts, indeed, contained no inhabitants. In one of these, Old Sarum, it was possible in dry seasons to trace the foundations of old build- ings by the color of the grass, in another, Midhurst, the sites of' old allotments were marked by stone posts — while one borough "had sunk beneath the waters of the North Sea." Yet each of these returned members to the House of Commons. In the colonies, representation was everywhere apportioned on a territorial basis, which was being constantly changed to suit the altered conditions of the several parts of each colony This right was regarded as a most valuable one in the colonies In the matter of the franchise there was an equally wide difference of opinion. In Great Britain, it depended for most part, upon the possession of some peculiar privilege. In the colonies, the franchise was regulated by general rules and was usually given to all free adult white men who possessed a moderate amount of property In Great Britain, there was no requirement of residence for the rep- 18 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS resentative or the voter. In the colonies, residence was ordinarily required for both the voter and representative To the colonist, therefore, the phrase "no taxation without representation" meant that no tax could be} levied except by vote of a legislative body in which a person known to the voter, and in whose election he had taken part, had a seat; but to an Englishman the phrase meant simply "no tax- ation except by vote of the House of Commons" (Channing, A Stu- dents' History of the United States, pp. 118-19). In England multitudes of tax-payers could not vote. If a town centuries before had not been big enough to send members to Parlia- ment, it could not now send members, however big it was. At the same time towns which once had received the right to send members and had grown small did not lose the right. If now the same lord owned all the property in a town or in three or four of them, he chose the members. Scores of members were in reality named by great lords or by the king. The colonists would not have endured a legis- lature like that. Their objection, however, was that parliament did not represent them in the sense in which they understood representa- tion (Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, p. 138). We, in this country, do not consider a person represented in a legislature unless he can cast a vote for a member of that legislature. In Great Britain, not individuals but classes were represented At that time, very few Englishmen could vote for a member of the House of Commons. Great cities like Liverpool, Leeds, Manchester, did not send even one member. When the colonists held that they were not represented in Parliament because they did not elect any members of that body, Englishmen answered that they were repre- sented, because they were commoners (McMaster, A School History of the United States, pp. 115-16). Many other examples might be cited, but the sentiment differs in no great degree. It is sufficient to indicate that the pupil reading such discussions would plainly observe a difference in the theories as to representation held in England and in America. Doubtless he will again conclude that the Americans were right and the English were wrong, but he will see at least that the English were not imposing burdens upon the colonists not borne by themselves, that they were accepting the same obligations to government and bearing them in the same manner as they de- ENGLAND AND AMERICA 19 manded from the colonial empire.32 On the other hand, only about one-half of the most frequently used textbooks make so clear the distinctions regarding the theory of representation and the taxing power as have the preceding. For example, Estill, in The Beginner's History of Our Country, merely says : The Americans did not mind paying a tax which they themselves had decided was right. But no Americans were allowed to be members of the English Parliament, by which the stamp law and all other stamp laws of England were passed. To the colonists this taxing them without their consent — without their being represented in Par- liament was more than the Americans could stand. From one end of the colonies to the other the people repeated the words of an Ameri- can speaker, "Taxation without representation is tyranny." They decided they would never pay the tax.33 Home's The Story of Our American People, written under the auspices of the American Legion, moreover, in explaining why the colonies and England drifted apart, ascribes the separation to the failure of the upper classes of England to sympathize with us. ". . . . They regarded the Americans as an ignorant frontier folk, incapable of orderly self-government or persistent 32 See also Burnham, op. cit., pp. 110-11; Fish, op. cit., pp. 135-36; Gordy, op. cit., p. 130; Guitteau, Our United States, pp. 145-46; Guitteau, The History of the United States, pp. 111-12; Fite, op. cit., p. 110; Franciscan Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration, A History of the United States, p. 171; James and Sanford, op. cit., p. 147; Hulbert, op. cit., p. 120; Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., pp. 144^45; Forman, op. cit., p. 113; Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 97-98; McLaughlin, op. cit., pp. 133-34; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, op. cit., pp. 144-45; O'Hara, op. cit., pp. 126-27; Evans, op. cit., p. 179; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 115; Beard, op. cit., p. 79 ;, West, History of the American People, pp. 187-88; Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 77; Barker, Webb, and Dodd, The Growth of a Nation, pp. 148-49. 33 Estill, op. cit., p. 156. See also Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, p. 183; Beard and Bagley, op. cit., pp. 130-31; Fite, The United States, p. 136; Lawler, op. cit., pp. 172-73; Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, pp. 148-49; McCarthy, History of the United States, pp. 150 ff.; Mace, op. cit., p. 141; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 112; Hart, School History of the United States, p. 123; Hart, New American History, p. 129; Elson, op. cit., p. 123; Robbins, op. cit., p. 112; Stephenson, op. cit., p. 153; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 151 ; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 125. 20 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS warfare," we are told. "Not even our successful Revolution could quite shake Britons out of this stubborn sureness of their superiority ' Britons have often since excused the course their Parliament then took against America by pointing out how well meant were some of the laws which most offended us. This avoids the real dispute, which was about Britain's right to make laws for us at all No authority which extends a law over a body of outsiders who object to it, can then demand or hope that the outsiders will be obedient when the law injures them, or grateful when it chances to turn in their favor. Americans had governed themselves from the beginning. They were now a grown-up people; and no power on earth could take self- government from them In this new land the mass of mankind had at last reached a level where they had enough intelligence to recognize and follow honest leaders, and had enough boldness and endurance to continue steadfast in defeat This question of self- rule was the real basis of all our trouble with Britain.34 The person held most accountable for the separation of the colonies from England is George III, described as "obstinate," "narrow-minded," "bigoted," "stubborn," "selfish," and "insane." Charged with the use of bribery to surround himself with min- isters and others who would carry out his will, he is conceded by few authors to have had any goodness hidden in his nature. He stands convicted as a foe to liberty, a believer in absolutism. And not the least of his faults was his German birth.35 A few authors, although criticizing his colonial policy, do not picture King George as the sum of all iniquities. West, in The History of the American People, describes him thus: "In his private life he exactly fulfilled the popular ideal of a good ruler. In an age when society was recklessly dissolute, he was chaste 34 Home, The Story of Our American People, I, 320-21. In regard to the Quartering Act this author also remarks: "The Americans, however, had already endured the insolence of British soldiers and British generals, and wanted no more of it" (ibid., p. 325). 35 Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., pp. 140-41 ; Leonard and Jacobs, op. cit., p. 163; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 146; Daffan, History of the United States, p. 179; Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 107-8; Home, The Story of Our Amer- ican People, I, 318. King George is unfavorably criticized in most of the books reviewed. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 21 in conduct, temperate in diet, and simple in manners. While ir re- ligion abounded, he kept a virtuous home, whose days, beginning with family prayer, were passed in laborious performance of duty." King George was exceedingly conscientious, but exceedingly wrong-headed and narrow-minded. He was a good man but a bad king.36 Hart, in his School History of the United States, says: In one of his (George Ill's) early speeches he said, "B'orn and educated in this country, I glory in the name of Briton." He was in many ways a good man, upright, truthful, and true to his friends ; but he was a poor king, for he was narrow, stubborn, and determined to be stronger than Parliament.37 The program of the king as it related to the American col- onies was not unanimously indorsed by Englishmen, according to Barnes, Beard and Bagley, Bourne and Benton, Burnham, El- son, Evans, Fish, Fite, and others.38 Out of forty histories most commonly used in the schools, only three fail to mention opposi- tion in England to the king's policy, a far better proportion than Altschul found.39 Taking this as a basis for a sweeping state- ment, which may be somewhat inaccurate, there are not over 36 West, History of the American People, p. 191, footnote. West quotes from Ford's American Politics, p. 344. 37 Hart, School History of the United States, p. 122. 38 Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, p. 187; Beard and Bagley, op. cit., pp. 137-39; Beard, op cit., p. 132; Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 85; Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, p. 140; Burnham, op. cit., pp. 113, 121; Elson, op. cit., p. 122; Evans, op. cit., p. 180; Fish, op. cit., p. 125; Fite, The United States, p. 140; Forman, op. cit., p. 116; Guitteau, History of the United States, p. 108; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 144; Halleck, op. cit., p. 177; Hart, School History of the United States, p. 126; Hart, New American History, p. 127; Hulbert, op. cit., p. 129; Home, The Story of Our American People, I, 318, 328; James and Sanford, op. cit., p. 150; Latane, op. cit., p. 93; Lawler, op. cit., p. 171; Leonard and Jacobs, op. cit., p. 149; McCarthy, op. cit., p. 159; McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 143; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, op. cit., p. 144; Mace, op. cit., pp. 144-45, 154; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., pp. 114, 118-19; Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 99, 107; O'Hara, op. cit., p. 126; Robbins, op. cit., pp. 110-11; Stephenson, op. cit., pp. 141, 146; Tryon and Lingley, The American People and Nation, p. 166; West, History of the American People, p. 192; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 152; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., pp. 138-40; Barker, Webb, and Dodd, op. cit., p. 170. 39Estill, op. cit.; McMaster, op. cit.; Thompson, First Book in United States History. 22 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS 7 per cent of our histories today failing to note this point, whereas ten years ago over 33 per cent were guilty of the omis- sion.40 True it is that many of the textbooks, in pointing out op- position in England to King George's plan, are not explicit in showing its real significance, but tend rather to establish more firmly a belief in the righteousness of colonial resistance. Yet at least they indicate that not all Englishmen were unsympathetic with a struggle for liberty, by all authors admitted to have been just. Textbook authors have likewise pointed out that sentiment on this side of the Atlantic also lacked unanimity. Unfortunately, in some books this disagreement between upholders and opponents of England's policy is not described in such way as to create in the pupil anything but antagonism for the former and ad- miration for the latter. Where it is indicated that the struggle was of such a nature that honest men could differ in opinion, a far saner attitude toward the struggle will result than has been held by many in the past. Thus, Muzzey tells his readers: This great event [the American Revolution] has sometimes been represented as the unanimous uprising of a downtrodden people against a tyrannical attack on their liberties. But there were many thousand Tories in the American colonies who agreed with a noted lawyer of Massachusetts that the Revolution was a "causeless, wanton, wicked rebellion," and there were thousands of Whigs in England who ap- plauded Pitt's denunciation of the war against America as "barbarous, unjust, and diabolical." It is evident from these that on each side of the Atlantic, opinion was divided as to colonial rights and British oppression.41 While describing a divergent loyalty by which they show that opinion neither in England nor America was co-ordinated, some textbooks make the Tories or Loyalists objects of contempt. This often occurs, not so much in the written word, as by in- nuendo. Indeed, the pupil is made to feel "that our war for in- 40 See Altschul, The American Revolution in Our School Text-Books, pp. 21, 153-68. 41 Muzzey, op. cit., p. 90. See also Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., pp. 139-40; McLaughlin, op cit., pp. 151-52. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 23 dependence was a very difficult one to win, because the patriots led by Washington and his associates were fighting, not only against the British army, but also against a large Tory faction at home," many of whom "spied upon the American troops, gave information to the British, and sold them much-needed sup- plies."42 The American Revolution is frequently found treated as an uprising of a part of the British empire against the home govern- ment in an effort to maintain self-government. As the preserver of English liberties, the Revolution, therefore, is held a blessing to the whole English-speaking people. From this standpoint alone if not from others, justification of colonial resistance would be established. As Woodburn and Moran put it, "Royal rule received a set-back everywhere and popular rights were ad- vanced."43 For, according to many historians, The American Revolution is seen imperfectly,, if it is looked upon solely as a struggle between England and America. It was a strife of principles. It was a part of a thousand-year-long contest between the English-speaking people and their kings for more political liberty. In 1776 the most advanced part of that people lived on this side of the Atlantic. The popular claims were made here and the struggle was fought out here 44 The character of the political rights inherited by all people of English descent and brought to America by the colonists does not escape attention. According to textbook writers, these "im- memorial rights" of Englishmen were held in sacred regard by the colonists. Any attempt to alter them or trespass upon them was held as dangerous to the liberty for which they had come.45 The gradual acceptance of political theories not common then in England is also given by authors such as Fish, Beard, and 42Burnham, op. cit., p. 137. Some textbooks point out that some Tories "were honorable men who believed it their duty to uphold the king." "Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 140. "West, History of the American People, pp. 192-93. See also, among others, Home, op. cit., p. 319; Long, op. cit., p. 151; McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 153. 45 For example, see Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 90-91; Fish, op. cit., p. 24; Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 44-50. 24 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS Channing as a cause in widening the breach between England and the colonies. The doctrine of natural rights, as set forth by John Locke in the seventeenth century and adopted by the colonists in the eighteenth, "was as English as the constitutional argu- ment," according to Beard.46 Yet few historians, even among the writers of senior high school textbooks, point out how the colonial leaders turned to the political theories of Locke when unable to carry conviction through the "immemorial rights" of Englishmen. Without doubt the descriptions of the hardships endured, the battles fought, and other heroic exploits of the war stir the emo- tions more than any other phase of the Revolution. It is here that authors have most deftly employed their powers of description. Consciously or unconsciously, they have used their rhetorical faculties to the degree that sympathies are quickened and hatreds aroused. Who is not moved by the heroism of Paul Revere? What child, does not see in fancy the lights in the church tower? Surely pulses beat more rapidly at the picture of "The Spirit of J76."47 And who is not moved by the words of Patrick Henry : The war has actually begun. The next gale that sweeps from the North will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms. Our brethren are already in the field. Why stand we here idle? .... Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!48 Critics who recently questioned the patriotism of textbook writers because of a failure to include heroic characters and incidents in their histories could not have looked into these books. One of the characters alleged to have been omitted was Paul Revere. Yet an examination of those textbooks most commonly 46 Beard, op. cit., pp. 95-96; Fish, op. cit., p. 133; Channing, A Students' History of the United States, pp. 114-15. 47 See, for example, Woodburn and Moran, op. cit.; Home, op. cit., Vol II. 48Muzzey, op. cit., p. 110; Hart, New American History, p. 153; Latane, op. cit., p. 124; Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 167; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 161. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 25 used finds the story of his ride chronicled in many. Nor are there lacking the details tending to rouse the emotions.49 At no place do colonial troops suffer in comparison with British regulars. For example, at Lexington "a determined little band of minute men" awaited British regulars. To Major Pit- cairn's "Disperse you villains," they "stood as motionless as a stone wall." At Concord the British again met the "stubborn resistance" of the colonial force, and "were compelled to re- treat."50 At Breed's Hill, the British twice "were driven back by the deadly fire of the untrained militia who coolly stood their ground until they saw the whites of the enemy's eyes." When forced to abandon the intrenchments, the Americans are said to have "re- tired in good order, leaving over 1,000 redcoats killed or wounded." With others, Muzzey points out that although tech- nically a defeat it was "virtually an inspiring victory for the Americans,"51 for On came the British. All was silent behind the breastworks. A thousand eyes were sighting the barrels, each with its man picked out. A thousand fingers pressed the firelocks ready to pull at the word. The courage shown was wonderful. "Don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes," said the American commander. The word was given, "Fire!" There were a few seconds of the "Pratt, America's Story for America's Children, V, 62-71; Elson, op. cit., p. 133; Burnham, op. cit., p. 128; Gordy, op. cit., pp. 138-39; Home, op. cit., I, 340; Long, op. cit., p. 169; Halleck, op. cit., p. 179; Estill, op. cit., pp. 158-59; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, History of the United States, p. 137; Fite, History of the United States, p. 120; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 105. This list includes histories in use from the elementary grades through senior high school. 60 Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., pp. 137-38; West, The Story of Our Country, pp. 162-63; Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 105-6; McLaughlin, op. cit., pp. 154-55; Long, op. cit., pp. 169-70; Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, pp. 150-51; and others. "Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 110-11. See also Fite, History of the United States, pp. 122-23; Pratt, op. cit., II, 69-73; Stephenson, op. cit., pp. 167-68; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., pp. 134-35; Mace, op. cit., pp. 158-59; Mc- Carthy, op. cit., p. 166; McMaster, op. cit., 129-30; Guitteau, History of the United States, pp. 129-30; Halleck, op. cit., p. 183; Evans, op. cit., pp. 191-92. 26 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS rattle of musketry; a cloud of smoke floated back; powder horns were lifted; bullets were rammed home. This was inside the works. Out- side, lay the harvest rows of death. The advancing line had melted. It was broken as a wave is broken when it strikes the rocks. The British soldiers who had come on in martial pride fell back in terror. Again urged on, threatened, beaten with swords, the British formed and charged. Again the cool marksmen behind the breastworks swept them out of life. Now came a time of danger to the Minute-men. Their powder was gone, and if the British should charge again, they would win. More troops came from Boston, and the third charge was made. It swept the patriots from the hill, and they fell back to escape capture. It was a costly victory for the British, who lost eleven hundred and fifty-four; the Continentals, four hundred and forty- nine.52 Descriptions of the winter at Valley Forge afford an oppor- tunity to kindle again the sympathies of pupils as they read of the sufferings endured. According to Beard and Bagley's His- tory of the American People, which presents a typical picture, The soldiers were in rags and half-starved all the time. Half went without shoes and blankets, and seldom did they have anything but the coarsest food. Lafayette, the young Frenchman who had come over the sea to dedicate himself to the cause of liberty, wrote of Valley Forge: "The unfortunate soldiers were in want of every- thing; they had neither coats, hats, shirts, nor shoes; their feet and legs froze until they became black The army frequently re- mained whole days without provisions and the patient endurance of both officers and men were a miracle." An undying faith in the justice of their cause and in the wisdom and ability of Washington kept the remnants of an army together.53 An anecdote frequently appearing in readers and occasionally found in histories is that of Marion and the British officer who dined with him. It is typical of discussions portraying the hard- 52 Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, pp. 195-96. 63 Beard and Bagley, op. cit., pp. 153-54. See also Thompson, A History of the People of the United States, p. 149; Stephenson, op. cit., p. 188; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 149; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., pp. 157-68; Channing, Elements of United States History, pp. 155-57; West, Story of Our Country, pp. 176-77. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 27 ships suffered by the American soldiers in their struggle for lib- erty. A British officer, so the story goes, visited Marion's camp, under a flag of truce, for the purpose of arranging an exchange of prisoners. Marion invited the officer to dine. There was neither chair nor stool; so the host and his guest sat on the trunk of a fallen tree. When the dinner was brought, it proved to be sweet potatoes served on pieces of pine bark. "Surely," said the officer, "this is not your usual fare?" Marion bowed and replied, "Yes, and as we have company for dinner, we are lucky to have a larger supply than usual." The officer was astonished. When he returned to the British camp, he told his comrades that it was useless to wage war against such determined men. Poorly clad and poorly fed, they would fight to the death for the sake of liberty. And he resigned from the army.54 Many instances of the use of adjectives describing the troops as courageous, brave, patriotic, and unselfish might be given. For example, at Yorktown they achieved "a noble victory";55 the campaign in the South was "one of the most brilliant in Ameri- can history" ;56 the victories at Trenton and Princeton were "re- markable feats" ;57 and King's Mountain" a splendid victory."58 It was "brilliant skill and dogged persistence" that at another time held back the British.59 On the other hand, equal praise is not given to the foe. "The British in their very cruelty, had aroused the people to resis- tance," one author avers in his discussion of the campaign of the South.60 "Britain's haughty treatment of other nation's ships at sea," according to The Story of Our American People, aroused the animosity of "almost all the world."61 The war in the West, 54 Thompson, First Book in United States History, pp. 224-25. 55Elson, op. cit., p. 174. 56Halleck, op. cit, pp. 208-9. 57 Fite, History of the United States, p. 138. 58 Thompson, First Book in United States History, pp. 225-26. 59 Home, op. cit., I, 314. 60 Thompson, First Book in United States History, p. 223. 61 Home, op. cit.fp. 383. 28 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS "more savage than military" marked by "brutal and senseless" raids, is thus characterized by Long and others.62 Where adjectives of praise are employed in discussing the British soldiers, the effect is often that of strengthening an im- pression of the unusual valor of the Americans rather than as- cribing a virtue to the English. Thus, "Twice the courageous English soldiers dashed up the hill only to be repulsed by the deadly fire of the patriot marksmen."63 Not only was the American army a worthy opponent for the British soldiers, but American ships "played havoc with the Brit- ish merchantmen."64 The superiority of the Americans is demon- strated to the reader in such discussions as that of the "Ranger," which "prowled about the coasts of Great Britain, took several merchant prizes, captured a British warship which carried more guns than the Ranger, and even burned some of the shipping in a port on the coast of England."65 Throughout, the discussions of the Revolution show, as The Story of Our American People puts it, "our people's courage and endurance."66 Stephenson declares: We study the wars in which our country has been engaged, first, because the courage and self-sacrifice of our ancestors serve to in- spire us with a like devotion to duty, even if need be, to the laying down of our lives; and second because they are precious lessons in how to defend ourselves.67 Of all the concepts gathered from a study of the Revolution, that of liberty will be the strongest and most indelibly stamped in the child's mind. In the discussion of the political aspects of the war, in the military movements, and in the social and psychological phases, liberty is the purpose of the struggle. Ab- stract discussions are attended by stories such as that of Ser- geant Jasper.68 If we believe the textbook writers, it is for liberty 62 Long, op. cit., p. 196. 63 Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 141. 64 Elson, op. cit., p. 167. " Home, op. cit., p. 413. 65 Burnham, op. cit., p. 148. 87 Stephenson, op. cit., p. 176. «s "For twelve hours a storm of steel broke over the little fort [ Fort Moultrie], which answered with all its guns. In the midst of the bombard- ment the flagstaff was splintered, and the blue flag of South Carolina bear- ENGLAND AND AMERICA 29 that America fought then ; it is liberty which America has exem- plified since. When, in 1917, Charles Altschul made his study of the Ameri- can Revolution in fifty-three textbooks then in use, he divided these histories into five classes: those dealing fully with the grievances of the colonists, giving an account of general political conditions in England prior to the American Revolution, and giving credit to prominent Englishmen for services rendered America ; those dealing fully with the grievances of the colonists, which make some reference to general political conditions in England prior to the American Revolution, and which mention some prominent Englishmen who rendered services to the Ameri- cans ; those dealing fully with the grievances of the colonists, which make no reference to general political conditions in Eng- land prior to the American Revolution, but make, at least, favor- able mention of several prominent Englishmen; those dealing fully with the grievances of the colonists which make no reference to general political conditions in England prior to the American Revolution, but mention, at least, Pitt 5 those dealing fully with the grievances of the colonists, which make no reference to gen- eral political conditions in England prior to the American Revo- lution, nor to any prominent Englishmen who devoted themselves to the cause of the Americans. In the first group, Mr. Altschul found six books; in the second, fourteen; in the third, thirteen; in the fourth, five; and in the last group, fifteen. That is, the greatest number of the books which he analyzed gave only the colonial viewpoint in the struggle between England and America.69 More than ten years have passed since Mr. Altschul's study was made. Although faith in the justice and wisdom of the patriot cause is undiminished, textbooks used most frequently ing the white word 'Liberty' fell outside the walls. After it leaped a boy, William Jasper. Hardly seen for the smoke of bursting shells, he wrapped the flag around his shoulders, climbed the wall, planted the broken staff among sand bags, and dropped back among his comrades, leaving 'Liberty' afloat above him" (Long, op. cit., p. 174). 69 Charles Altschul, op. cit. 30 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS today may be grouped in Mr. Altschul's first two classes. On the whole, the histories of today cannot be criticized for setting forth only the viewpoint of the colonials. Yet the patriot cause does not meet a real challenge even in the most impartial narratives. Throughout, the reader is convinced that the colonists were right. On the other hand, the lack of detail in discussing the English attitude, even in those books dealing most fully with it, may account for the reaction of the reader. For some pupils, undoubtedly, the discussions of Burke, Fox, Pitt, and others favorable to the American cause will strengthen the antagonism toward the English, since even some of the English themselves approved of the colonial cause ! The discussion of the Loyalists in America seldom will offset this impression. But it is a question as to whether the controversy can be better or more fairly treated in the narrow limits of a textbook than it has been by historians such as Muzzey, McLaughlin, Beard, West, and others. Whether the pupil will conclude that the patriot cause was indisputably right will lie, not only with the historian, but also with the teacher who presents the written word. The textbook writer surely is not entirely responsible for the attitudes gained. In nearly all passages, even where im- partiality has been evinced by author, explanation and inter- pretation by teacher will be necessary in view of the contro- versial character of the subject and because of the inherited antagonism toward Great Britain held by many pupils. As one college student, in assessing the responsibility for his dislike of Russia, said: This dislike was formed partly, I think, because my instructor (in history) had this dislike. She had traveled in Russia and dis- liked it, and transmitted this dislike to me. But at the same time she liked France so very well that this country was brought to my liking. Before this time I had no particular liking for France. Textbook narratives of the period following the American Revolution describe conditions in such a way as to continue the impressions gained up to that point. Instead of "wisely seeking to conciliate and win us, [England] was exasperating in the ENGLAND AND AMERICA 31 extreme," declares McLaughlin, in A History of the American Nation. He further explains that as a "weak" nation England long refused to treat us as an equal. Not till 1791 did she send a minister to this country. The treaty of 1783 had not been fulfilled by either party. England retained possession of the military posts on our Northern and Western frontier within the limits of the United States. She gave as her excuse that, contrary to the treaty, the loyalists had been persecuted and the British creditors prevented from collecting sums due them by American citizens. Her charges — at least during the time of the Confederation — had too much truth in them; but her main reason for retaining the Western posts was her desire to control the fur trade and to maintain her influence over the Indians.70 Similar discussions relating to our relations with Great Brit- ain in the period directly following the Peace of Paris are found in other histories. Guitteau points out that "foreign countries treated the new nation with contempt. Great Britain declined to make a commercial treaty with a government powerless to compel its thirteen states to observe the agreement." Some of the textbooks place the blame, at least to some extent, on the weakness of the government under the Articles of Confederation.71 In 1793, when France and Great Britain engaged in war, it was thought, historians tell the pupils, that "our country would find itself on the side of France."72 The Genet episode occurred, followed by the Neutrality Act.73 Then come discussions point- ing out the great opportunity for trade which was opened to America. "Never had we such a chance of making money," de- clares Fish. Yet in this the Americans were foiled by their old enemy England. "The British government wished to prevent this trade," continues this author, "and maintained that international 70 McLaughlin, op. cit., pp. 209, 211. "Guitteau, Our United States, pp. 217-18. See also Long, op. cit., p. 236; Channing, Elements of United States History, pp. 176, 191; Elson, op. cit., pp. 217-18; Barnes, Short American History, p. 115; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 138; Gordy, op. cit., p. 176; Forman, op. cit., p. 199; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 169. 72 Fish, op. cit., p. 201. 73 Treated in other sections of this study. 32 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS law allowed them to do so. In the spring of 1794, the British seized a hundred and fifty of our ships. We maintained that the trade was legal, and demanded that the ships be released."74 On the whole, the Jay Treaty is said to have been "a fairly good treaty,"75 "probably the best that could have been made under the circumstances,"76 and one that saved us from war.77 Its reception in America is recounted by many books, as well as the fact that it did not settle all of the disputes between Great Britain and the United States. "In time, however," says The Story of Our American People, "everyone came to see that this was the best possible treaty for us. It increased our ship- ping trade enormously, and it enabled us to postpone honorably for twenty years our second unavoidable war with Britain."78 The impressment of American seamen is given as the chief cause of our second war with England, called by Home and others "the second war for independence" ; a war which was "a story of outworn patience, and of mistakes which ended in un- expected fortune" ;79 a "war for the freedom of our seamen."8 The pictures drawn of the cause for desertion from Great Britain's service make her indeed a hard taskmaster. The follow- ing quotations illustrate the cruelty, the harshness, and the un- fairness of the British as set forth in many of our histories: More than six thousand naturalized Americans had thus far virtu- ally been enslaved in Great Britain's navy, with poor food, low wages, and harsh treatment, and they were obliged, under threat of severe punishment, to assist in annoying their fellow countrymen. No "Fish, op. cit., p. 202. See also Guitteau, History of the United States, p. 204; Beard, op. cit., p. 177; Leonard and Jacobs, op. cit., p. 232; Lawler, op. cit., p. 242; Robbins, op. cit., p. 196; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 198; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 182. The treatment of the period is similar in most textbooks. 78 Fish, op. cit., p. 203. 76 Thompson, A History of the People of the United States, p. 200. 77 Guitteau, Our United States, p. 247 ; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 198; Beard and Bagley, op. cit., p. 197. 78 Home, The Story of Our American People, II, 29. See also Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 200; Burnham, op. cit., p. 208. 79 Home, op. cit., p. 80. 80Estill, op. cit., chapter title. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 33 doubt some of these kidnapped men actually were deserters from the British navy, as its officers claimed; but the majority were really Americans, and were taken simply because the British wanted these able-bodied fellows for their own ships [Thwaites and Kendall, A History of the United States, p. 250]. In order to do this [impressment], the British often stopped the vessels of other nations at sea and marched the crews before the British officers, who picked out supposed deserters or British sub- jects and forced them into British ships. American vessels were so treated almost from the founding of our government, and it often happened that through mistake, or carelessness, or wanton insolence, American-born citizens were dragged from their own ships and forced into the service of the king. Again and again as the years passed the United States protested against the practice, but did not feel strong enough to make absolute demands. But a time was coming. It is true that Great Britain had reason to be alarmed at the numerous desertions from her navy, but it was her own fault. She treated her sailors so harshly and paid them so meagerly that great numbers of them escaped when they could. Sometimes a British vessel could hardly depart from an American port owing to the many desertions of her crew. Better treatment and larger pay in the Ameri- can ships had greater weight with Jack Tar than his allegiance to his own sovereign. More than once the American government offered to make a treaty with Great Britain for the return of deserters from both sides, but she preferred to carry on her practice of forcible im- pressment [Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, pp. 264—65]. All histories analyzed give as the primary purpose of the struggle the abolition of the practice of impressment. In many textbooks the desire to annex Canada is mentioned as an acces- sory motive, and many charge France, as well as England, with a violation of our rights as a neutral nation. Yet England is made the greater transgressor. As Barnes, in his American His- tory for Grammar Grades, puts it: England and France held to their evil course toward our country during Madison's first term. England was very abusive. By this time, fully a thousand of our trading vessels had been taken by the English navy, and thousands of good American sailors were serving against their will in English warships. They were like slaves, com- 34 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS pelled to fight for their masters, and flogged if they did not work well Insults and outrages from England could be borne no longer, and, though the United States was in no condition for fight- ing, war was declared against England in June, 1812.81 Home, in The Story of Our American People, however, does not make England the greater offender but says: "Upon the whole France treated us rather the worse of the two ; but Britain was the more openly defiant about it."82 He also attributes a perplexity to the American people as to which country, they should fight, a problem finally solved by our nearness to Canada and "the traditions of democracy," which still leaned toward friendship with France, "despite the excesses of her Revolution."83 Although many authors indicate that a longing to possess Canada actuated some Americans in the selection of a foe, yet it is sel- dom asserted that France harmed us more than did Great Britain. The desire for Canada is ascribed to westerners like Clay and Calhoun as an impelling motive in making war on England. It is due to their influence, then, the pupil is told, that Madison, a lover of peace like Jefferson, was forced into war.84 By other authors Canada is mentioned as a deciding factor in the selection 81 Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, p. 254. See also, among others, Leonard and Jacobs, op. cit., p. 250; Halleck, op. cit., p. 256; Latane, op. cit., p. 226; Burnham, op. cit., p. 235; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 217. "It [impressment] was a towering insult. Although France followed the same practice to some extent, her offenses along this line were not to be compared with those of Great Britain" (Fite, The United States, p. 206). 82 Op. cit., II, 74. 83 Ibid., p. 82. Other authors also indicate that France was still held in a more favorable light, owing to her help in the Revolution. See Halleck, op. cit., p. 261; Beard, op. cit., p. 199; Fite, History of the United States, pp. 196, 229. 84 Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 253-54; Beard and Bagley, op. cit., p. 222; Beard, op. cit., p. 199; Burnham, op. cit., pp. 240-41; Chan- ning, A Students' History of the United States, p. 300; Fite, History of the United States, pp. 229-30; Fite, The United States, p. 209; Franciscan Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration, op. cit., p. 299; Hart, School History of the United States, p. 205;, Hulbert, op. cit., p. 221; James and Sanford, op. cit., p. 259; Latan6, op. cit., p. 235; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, op. cit., p. 262; McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 245; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 184; Thompson, First Book in United States History, p. 245; Tryon and Lingley, op. cit., p. 279; West, History of the American People, p. 399. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 35 of a foe because of her nearness to attack, or because "it was generally believed that British agents in Canada were guilty of stirring up the Indians against our settlements on the frontier."85 The last group of writers do not attribute, either openly or covertly, land-hunger to the "War Hawks" in Congress. Accord- ing to Elson, "It was not so much land-greed that led to desire of the invasion of Canada; it was more a belief that it would put an end to Indian massacres, supposed to be inspired by Brit- ish fur-trading interests."86 As in most wars, the War of 1812 arose out of a need to pro- tect national honor, according to some historians. "There seemed no honorable way for averting war with Great Britain," declares Thompson. "President Madison was a man of peace, but he was forced to go to war to uphold the honor of his country and to protect her rights," assert Woodburn and Moran. And Hulbert points out that England's treatment was looked upon "as an in- dignity no respectable nation could endure."87 Yet some authors doubt the wisdom or the timeliness of the selection of the foe, for, as Hart puts it: It was an unlucky moment to make war against England, for in 1812 the Russians grew tired of the Continental System and refused any longer to support France. Napoleon therefore raised a "Grand Army" of 550,000 men and led them into the heart of Russia. How- ever unfairly England had acted toward the United States, the English were fighting in 1812 for the freedom of Europe and America, against a military despot who was trying to make himself absolute master of Europe. 85 Elson, op. cit., p. 273; Channing, Elements of United States History, p. 218; Fish, op. cit., p. 208; Forman, op. cit., p. 227; Guitteau, History of the United States, p. 238; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 271; Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 259; Hart, New American History, p. 254; Home, The Story of Our American People, II, 84; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 197; Mace, op. cit., p. 246; O'Hara, op. cit., p. 214; Stephenson, op. cit., p. 250; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 256; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 232. 80 Elson, op. cit., pp. 274-75. 87 Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 213; Wood- burn and Moran, op. cit., p. 234; Hulbert, op. cit.,, p. 221. See also Fite, The United States, p. 209; West, History of the American People, p. 395. 36 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS The time was unfortunate also within the United States. The Federalists, after saying that "the administration could not be kicked into a war," now voted and worked against war; for they knew that England would have a right in war time to capture any Ameri- can vessels found at sea. Many of the Republicans in the Middle States also were opposed to the war The country was divided, and a large number of the people were opposed to war with Eng- land.88 From an international point of view, the War of 1812 was a terrible misfortune [says Channing]. Great Britain was then engaged in a deadly struggle with the military despotism that threatened to overwhelm popular freedom wherever it existed in the world True policy dictated the alliance of Great Britain and the United States tci destroy the master despot of the age.89 According to West, Our government shilly-shallied, in impotent indecision (between 1806 and 1810), until the energetic part of the nation rose wrath- fully to demand that we fight someone at once to win back self- respect. Then we chose the wrong time, and apparently the wrong foe. Unfortunately, too, our choice of a foe arrayed us on the side of the European despot against the only hope for European free- dom.90 The difficulties of communication of the time are given by Halleck, West, Barnes, McMaster, and Elson as a contributory cause in the declaration of war. "If there had been an Atlantic cable, the conflict might have been avoided," declares Halleck. "Had there been less haste it would have been better, for, no doubt, a peaceful settlement could have been made," is the state- ment of Barnes.91 In the actual military engagements between England and America, most textbook writers indulge in glorifying our heroes, 88 Hart, School History of the United States, pp. 205-6. 89 Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 309. 90 West, History of the American People, pp. 395-96. 91 Halleck, op. cit., p. 261; West, History of the American People, p. 399; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 257; Barnes, Short American History by Grades, p. 151; McMaster, op. cit., p. 231; Elson, op. cit., p. 273; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 184. These are merely examples. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 37 in condemning the tactics of war employed by the enemy, and in proclaiming our superiority as fighters although greatly out- classed in material resources. Although preceding the declaration of war, descriptions of the Chesapeake and Leopard affair establish an attitude of hostility. "Such a wanton insult to the American flag had not occurred since the nation was founded," says Elson.92 For "this out- rage,"93 according to other authors, the "British government made a half-hearted apology."94 The discussion attending this episode as given by Gordy and Guitteau is an example of how two authors can engender entirely different attitudes in a dis- cussion relating to the same event: The Chesapeake, not being in a condition to make resistance, sur- rendered. She was boarded and four of her crew were arrested as deserters and taken on board the Leopard. Three of these afterward proved to be Americans and were released. The people were deeply offended and in some quarters there was a clamor for war. As the country was not prepared at that time for open hostilities, Jefferson went no further than to enter a protest, and warned British men-of- war to leave American waters. In return, the British Government made a half-hearted apology although it declared its purpose to continue the impressment of seamen [Gordy, History of the United States, p. 220]. The entire country was stirred by this outrage, and there were loud demands for war. President Jefferson resisted this demand, for he reasoned that the act was that of the British admiral alone, and was probably unauthorized by his government. To allay popu- lar resentment, the President issued a proclamation ordering all British warships out of American waters. He also instructed our minister at London to demand a disavowal of the act and restoration of the men impressed. The British government complied with this demand, restored the impressed seamen to the deck of the Chesapeake and paid a money award to the wounded soldiers and to the families of those slain. Great Britain announced that she did not claim the 92 Elson, op. cit., p. 265. 93 Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 217; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 265. 94 Gordy, op. cit., p. 220. 38 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS right to search merchant ships. Thus the Chesapeake affair was due to the blunder of an individual commander, whose act was disavowed by his own government [Guitteau, Our United States, p. 265]. In general, in the discussions relating to battles of the war, the success of American arms is not modestly concealed. Perry's victory on Lake Erie was "a terrific fight .... abounding in heroic incidents," a battle which brought about the only re- corded surrender of a British squadron; best expressed by the frequently recorded words : "We have met the enemy and they are ours, — two ships, two brigs, one schooner, one sloop."9 Our warships are said to have carried on a "glorious work," repeatedly defeating "Britain's world-winning ships in equal bat- tle," by "the superior shooting of our men."96 "In the first six months of war we captured more warships from Britain than she had surrendered to all the world in twenty years against France and Europe," says Home.97 Indeed, the Americans were such dangerous and courageous foes that, according to this same author, an "astounded" British officer after another combat wrote home, "God deliver us from our enemies, if this is the way they fight!"98 At Horseshoe Bend, Jackson and his "straight-shooting back- woodsmen" in "a whirlwind campaign" smashed the Indian power of the South.99 Then, according to one writer, followed a cam- paign of "terrorism" against our coast towns. In a spirit of "vandalism," for "which no military excuse can be given because none is possible," Washington was burned.100 "It [the burning of Washington] was a piece of ruthless war- fare which admitted of no defense. Even in England there was a general feeling that the destruction of non-warlike buildings was an outrage inconsistent with civilized warfare," states Evans.101 85 Long, op. cit., p. 264; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 186; Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 256; Fish, op. cit., p. 209; Home, The Story of Our American People, II, 89. Most histories give the slogan. 96 Ibid., p. 91. 97 Ibid., p. 92. See also Long, op. cit., p. 268. 98 Home, op. cit., p. 96. 99 Long, op. cit., p. 264. 10° Ibid., p. 266. 101 Evans, op. cit., p. 268. See Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, p. 260; Burnham, op. cit., p. 247; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 280; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 230. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 39 Mace and Bogardus, Elson, West, McLaughlin and Van Tyne are among the authors who point out that the burning of Wash- ington was a retaliatory measure for the burning of Toronto by Americans.10' [In their] raids on peaceable towns [says Long] they [the British] aimed to break the American spirit and bring about the peace of fear. Precisely as in the War of Independence, their effort was to arouse the nation., to strengthen the grim resolve to fight the war out to the bitter end.103 The British vessels visited the coasts of Maryland, Virginia, and the Carolinas, more in the character of pirates and plunderers than of honorable soldiers [asserts Daffan]. Ports were blockaded, villages and farm houses were burned, churches looted, and in not a few in- stances the sick were murdered in their beds.104 In 1814, MacDonough "duplicated Perry's glorious feat on Lake Erie," the pupil is told, when "with a few gunboats hastily built he gave battle, and after five hours of fighting destroyed or captured the whole British squadron."1 "His [MacDonough's] superior seamanship enabled him to slacken and then to silence the enemy's fire," says McCarthy, in his History of the United States for Catholic Schools, in which he explains to the pupil, by a footnote, that the captain was of Irish ancestry. "In two hours the most dangerous of the Brit- ish vessels struck her colors," he continues. "Within half an hour more the other vessels were disabled. About two hundred Americans had been killed and wounded ; the losses of the British were at least three hundred."1 In the closing days of the war, so the reader is told, Jackson "with his hard-fighting, straight-shooting Tennessee frontiers- men" and others won an "astounding" victory at New Orleans, 102 Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 203; Elson, op. cit., p. 286; West, History of the American People, p. 400; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, op. cit., p. 268. See also McCarthy, op. cit., p. 265, footnote; O'Hara, op. cit., p. 221; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 218; Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 264. 103 Long, op. cit., p. 266. 104 Daffan, op. cit., pp. 294-95. 105 Long, op. cit., p. 266. 106 McCarthy, The History of the United States for Catholic Schools, pp. 266-67. 40 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS a battle in which the British lost over two thousand men and the American loss was less than a hundred.107 It is unnecessary to enter into further detail to illustrate the discussions characteristic of most textbooks. A few authors make clear that "from a military point of view, the War of 1812 was not a great struggle."1 Muzzey points out that "in the end, the Americans were the worse sufferers by the war," econom- ically, and in its military aspect that eventually "our little navy, in spite of its exploits, had to yield to Great Britain's superiority in numbers."109 The War originated in blunder. It cost two hundred millions of dollars and thirty thousand lives — besides the incalculable waste and agony that go with war. It was conducted discreditably. And it ended without mention of the questions that caused it. Still it did give a new impulse to Nationality and to Americanism Once more we had "whipped England."110 On the whole, the results of the war are pictured as beneficial. "It made other nations respect our vessels on the seas," it en- couraged home manufactures;111 it resulted in Great Britain's acceptance of American equality;112 it fired the country with the spirit of nationalism;113 it gave us commercial indepen- dence;114 and it showed the world that we "could and would de- fend our rights."115 The textbook writer, implanting in the pupil's mind the im- pression that Great Britain had been beaten again by the United States in a struggle for the rights of men, has but strengthened a nationalistic egotism attributed to Americans. It is undoubt- 107 Home, op. cit., pp. 103-4. 108 Forman, op. cit.) p. 234. See also Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 254, 255, 257. 109 Muzzey, op. cit., p. 187. 110 West, History of the American People, p. 409. 111 Barnes, Short American History by Grades, p. 167; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 221. 112 Hart, School History of the United States, p. 212. 113 Ibid.; Mace, op. cit., p. 255; Leonard and Jacobs, op. cit., p. 267; McMaster, op. cit., p. 239; McLaughlin, op. cit., pp. 253-54. 114 Fite, History of the United States, p. 236 ; Gordy, op. cit., p. 231. 115 Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 268. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 41 edly true that to many may be ascribed a profound belief in American invincibility. For there are not a few who hold that there is no foe whom America could not "whip before breakfast." Following the War of 1812 until the Civil War, historic ac- counts do not devote much space to Anglo-American relations. The Rush-Bagot Agreement of 1817 is not discussed by all text- books, and in those in which disarmament of the Great Lakes region is mentioned, the treaty is often not given by name. Nor is the real significance of the convention stressed. Yet some au- thors have not failed to call attention to it.116 According to West, however, This humane and sensible arrangement is the nearest approach to disarmament yet reached by international agreement. For the cen- tury since, in striking contrast to the constant threat of all European frontiers with their frowning fortresses crowded with hostile-minded soldiery, Canada and the United States have smiled in constant friendliness across the peaceful waters that unite our lands.117 In 1818, according to Professor Channing, "an important treaty was negotiated [between England and the United States] in regard to the fisheries and the northern boundary of the Unit- ed States."1 This agreement and the convention regarding the Oregon country are not unnoticed by frequently used textbooks, including those by West, Bourne and Benton, Thompson, Beard, Forman, and Muzzey.119 116 Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 268-69; Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 501; Course with Type Studies, Book IV, p. 74; Fite, History of the United States, pp. 236-37; Fite, The United States, pp. 217-18; Hulbert, op. cit., p. 227; Latane, op. cit., p. 250; Fish, op. cit., p. 212; Long, op. cit., p. 271; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 205; Lawler, op. cit., p. 276; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 240; Halleck, op. cit., p. 269; Stephen- son, op. cit., p. 255; West, History of the American People, p. 423; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 263; Guitteau, Our United States, pp. 284-85; Elson, op. cit., pp. 288-89; Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, p. 257. 117 West, History of the American People, p. 423. 118 Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 320; Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 268. 119 West, History of the American People, p. 424; Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 268-69; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 223; Beard, op. cit., p. 284; Forman, op. cit., p. 246; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 266. 42 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS Nor is the influence of England in the pronouncement of the Monroe Doctrine entirely neglected. "Four times Canning, cast- ing about for an effective policy, proposed to the United States a joint declaration against any plan to subjugate the Spanish republics" declare Bourne and Benton, in their textbook for senior high schools.120 Muzzey, Channing, Beard, Hart, and others do not pass unnoted this aspect of English interest in a doctrine which came to be purely American.121 Few authors explain in so great detail as Bourne and Benton the points of controversy considered in the Webster-Ashburton Treaty; neither is the seriousness of the situation as clearly set forth nor the achievement of the peacemakers. These authors make clear how a latent anti-British feeling in the country was aroused by the issues involved, and how, on the other hand, anti- American sentiment grew in England because of the repudiation of debts by American states. The significance of the treaty is, therefore, made the more evident.122 In general, the settlement of the dispute over the Oregon ter- ritory is said to have "avoided war with Great Britain,"1 3 and that it was "fair for both countries."124 Some writers, on the other hand, assert that "not without cause were some of those pioneers angry over the result."125 The attitude of the governmental group in England during the Civil War, as set forth in our histories, has long rancored 120 Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 273-74. 121 Muzzey, op. cit., p. 206; Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 327; Beard, op. cit., p. 206; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 266; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, op. cit., p. 283; Hart, School History of the United States,. p. 241; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 246. These are samples. 122 Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 345-48. See for customary treatment: Fite, History of the United States, p. 310; Fish, op. cit., p. 291; McLaughlin, op. cit., pp. 313-14; Daffan, op. cit., p. 331; Home, op. cit., II, 168; Hart, School History of the United States, p. 285; Stephenson, op. cit., p. 295. Some textbooks such as Woodburn and Moran, Mace and Bogardus fail to mention the treaty. 123 Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 306. 124 Muzzey, op. cit., p. 342; see also Beard and Bagley, op. cit., p. 215. 125 Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 267. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 43 in the hearts of northerners. For they have held that "animosity toward the United States and friendship for the Confederacy were plainly displayed in England by the aristocracy, by the majority of the commercial and moneyed classes, and by news- papers."126 Discussions are focused, in general, about England's recog- nition of the belligerency of the South, the Trent affair, and the Alabama claims. In the latter connection the Treaty of Washington and the Geneva Award have their part. Substan- tially all histories deal in a similar vein with these matters. Many of them indicate that cotton played its part in directing the sympathies of Great Britain, and that men like Richard Cob- den, John Bright, and Goldwin Smith supported the northern side.127 In the Trent affair, "the conduct of Great Britain," accord- ing to McMaster, "was most insulting and warlike, and nothing but the justice of her demand prevented war." On the other hand, Stephenson asserts that "Mason and Slidell were not in the Confederate army and so should have been safe against cap- ture."128 The official attitude of Great Britain at this time is said to have been a good opportunity "to embarrass the United States in a time of great difficulty."1 ' Not only were England's actions said to have been against "the spirit of fair play," but also contrary to "the laws of nations."1 In the settlement of the Alabama claims and other disputes through arbitration, authors in several instances have com- mended to the pupil this method of adjusting international dis- agreements. "By arbitrating the 'Alabama Claims,' and other disputes then and since, Great Britain and the United States 126 James and Sanford, op. cit., p. 401. 127 A typical treatment is found in Channing, A Students' History of the United States, pp. 470-71. 128 McMaster, op. cit., p. 413; Stephenson, op. cit., p. 344. 129 Channing, op. cit., p. 471. 130 Barnes, Short American History for Grades, p. 272. 44 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS have shown the world that there is a better way than war to settle differences between nations," says Burnham.131 The next example of the success of arbitration between the two English-speaking peoples was in the settlement of the seal fisheries controversy which, according to Forman, "led to a dis- pute so heated as to threaten a break between Great Britain and the United States."132 Histories then discuss the Venezuelan boundary dispute. Here, as in the preceding instances, the effectiveness of arbitration is again mentioned. In practically all books treating the topic, the application of the Monroe Doctrine is explained, as well as the victory gained in the decision.133 The statement of Home, in The Story of Our American People, is : The Monroe Doctrine was thus given a new and broader use than ever before, and our government was again brought before the eyes of Europe, as in the Samoan case. We had few foreign interests; but when these were interfered with, we were determined to main- tain them even in the face of Europe's greatest warlike Powers.134 According to Guitteau a growing friendship between Great Britain and the United States had its influence in the settlement by means of arbitration,135 but other authors occasionally use phrases and words which do not put England in a favorable light. "The brusque attitude of Great Britain aroused our govern- ment to an aggressive and spirited course of action," says For- man.136 "England's stubbornness," English attempts "to ignore the United States even after Venezuela had asked us to mediate in her behalf to save over twenty thousand acres of mineral lands 131 Burnham, op. cit., p. 469. See also West, The Story of Our Country, p. 407; Mace, op. cit., p. 396; Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 415; Fite, The United States, p. 391; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 482; Gordy, op. cit., p. 420. 132 Forman, op. cit., pp. 493-94. 183 See Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, p. 349; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 486. 134 Op. cit., II, 343. 136 Guitteau, Our United States. 136 Forman, op. cit., p. 511. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 45 in dispute,"137 and England's "indignation"138 are other expres- sions found. Yet the excerpt quoted from Thompson's History of the Peo- ple of the United States is, in general, typical: For many years there had been a dispute between Great Britain and Venezuela concerning the boundary between British Guiana and Venezuela. Although Venezeula wished to submit the matter to arbi- tration, and the United States advised such a course, the British government refused to arbitrate. From time to time, Great Brita.in pushed its boundary line farther into territory claimed by Venezuela. President Cleveland, holding that the action of Great Britain was contrary to the Monroe Doctrine, in 1895 asked Congress for au- thority to appoint a commission to ascertain the true boundary be- tween Venezuela and British Guiana, and recommended that the United States insist upon the acceptance of the commission's find- ing. Congress authorized the appointment of the commission, and war clouds for a while hung over the two great English-speaking countries, for unless Great Britain should accept this or some other satisfactory plan of settling the question, it did not seem possible to avoid hostilities The British government yielded and the com- mission of arbitration settled the dispute in favor of Great Britain.139 A further effort at arbitration as a means of settling inter- national differences rarely mentioned in the histories was the treaty suggested by England which failed to pass the United States Senate in 1897.140 The abrogation of the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, characterized by Fite as "a grave mistake on the part of the United States,"1*1 is mentioned in several of the most commonly used textbooks. According to Bourne and Benton, "Since the Venezuela episode of President Cleveland, British statesmen had been anxious to establish more cordial relations with the United States," and "in 137 Hulbert, op. cit., p. 484. 138 Latane, op. cit., p. 491. 139 Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 419. 140Elson, op. cit., p. 475; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 472. 141 Fite, History of the United States, p. 325. 46 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS 1901 Secretary Hay was able to secure a treaty satisfactory to the United States and Great Britain."142 The favorable attitude of England toward the United States during the Spanish- American War is recounted by a few writers. Here are enumerated events, for instance, in the blockade of Manila, tending to show British sympathy and co-operation with America's undertaking as opposed to evidences of German hostil- ity,143 as well as gestures of favorable opinion at the opening of the war. England as an ally in the World War naturally is accorded nothing but praise. Even in the events preceding our entrance into the war, when occasions for controversy regarding neutral trade are discussed, it is made clear that England destroyed no American lives in enforcing her blockade of Germany. Here is made a sharp distinction between German and English practices. Whereas Germany is charged with committing offenses of the most hideous character in her submarine campaign, England is exonerated in her conduct of the blockade. In the war, the Brit- ish soldiers are said to have been courageous and daring, evinc- ing a fine spirit of co-operation with their allies in arms. "To- day," the pupil is told, "England is a democracy" ;144 and as "the Mistress of the Seas stands as one of the very greatest of nations," in which "extensive political reforms," made during the century following the American Revolution, have left her as "a most democratic country."146 A question can well be raised as to whether the memories of the pupil fired by the usual discussions of the American Revolu- tion and the War of 1812 can be obliterated by abstractions re- lating to the democracy of England's present government, as- 142 Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 556. See also Muzzey, op. cit., p. 297; McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 524; Forman, op. cit., pp. 317, 540; Hulbert, op. cit., pp. 297, 354, 504. 143 Among them are Fite, History of the United States, p. 500; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 462; Latan6, op. cit., p. 503; Guitteau, History of the United States, pp. 560-61; Home, The Story of Our American People, II, 352; Stephenson, op. cit., p. 430; Beard, op. cit., pp. 496-97. 144 Stephenson, op. cit., p. 157. 148 Robbins, op. cit., p. 492. ENGLAND AND AMERICA 47 cription to her of the parenthood of American Institutions, and pronouncements of her friendship for the United States. Those histories which indulge in these discussions have usually at- tempted a fairness in the portrayal of controversies between the two countries. Unfortunately, they are not all the textbooks used, but in the growth of a spirit of fair play, which Americans claim as a national trait, it is probable that their use will in- crease. CHAPTER III FRANCE IN UNITED STATES HISTORY TEXTBOOKS As England is the traditional enemy of the United States, so is France our traditional friend. This attitude is due pri- marily to her aid during the Revolutionary War. That transcends all other diplomatic contacts either amicable or hostile. Even in the Colonial period, the French Huguenots are described as "a particularly desirable class of settlers and, in proportion to their numbers," as adding "a very great contribution to the making of our country."1 Prior to the opening of the American Revolution, French colonial policy, in general, is characterized by histories in an unfavorable light as contrasted with the English. Attention is also given to the hostile inroads made by the French on colonial holdings as well as their alliances with the Indians against the English.2 The vigorous assistance of the colonists in the Franco- English wars during the early eighteenth century has been treated in the previous section of this study, but it may be said again that the French as enemies did not seem as horrible in that role as other nations have appeared. The motives of France in allying herself in the War for Ameri- can Independence are portrayed by different historians with varying degrees of unselfishness on the part of France. Yet even by those authors who point out that the age-long enmity between France and England doubtless had its influence in inducing the French to take up arms for America, the aid given is acclaimed as generous and valuable. "True," says McLaughlin, "the French had not entered the Revolutionary War so much for the purpose of helping America 1 Burnham, The Making of Our Country, p. 66. See also Muzzey, An American History, p. 63. 2 See, for example, Nida, The Dawn of American History, pp. 365-66; Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 72 ff.; Hart, New American History, pp. 37 ff.; Long, America, pp. 130-31. 48 FRANCE AND THE UNITED STATES 49 as of injuring England, but they seemed to the men of the time generous benefactors."3 The French [declares Fite], since their humiliating losses in the French and Indian War, had been burning for revenge on the British, and were now pleased to see the apparent breaking up of the Ameri- can empire of their rivals France concluded a treaty of amity and commerce and another alliance with the struggling states, which she recognized as a free and independent nation. The timely inter- vention proved the turning point of the war for the United States, for it not only encouraged the new nation, but also secured to them sup- plies of French guns, ammunition, and clothing, and ultimately the assistance of the French army and navy.4 "This court is interested in separating us from Great Britain, but it is not their interest that we should become a great and formidable people," John Jay is quoted by Muzzey as saying about France. To this the author adds: "Yet we were greatly beholden to France. Her aid in men, ships, and money had been so timely and generous that it is almost certain that without it the American cause would have been lost."5 Much gratitude, moreover, is bestowed by textbook authors on the French for this assistance. "This alliance helped to change the world's his- tory," declares Halleck. "We should remember that it is doubt- ful if we could have secured our independence at that time with- out the aid of French money and of the French fleet and army."6 "This [aid of France] was the real turning point of the war," assert Mace and Bogardus. "It is difficult to see how Amer- ica could have won her independence without the help of France."7 It is likewise pointed out by Elson that "Cornwallis could not have been captured without French aid," and "it is doubtful if 3 McLaughlin, History of the American Nation, p. 210. 4 Fite, History of the United States, pp. 141-42. 6 Muzzey, op. cit., p. 129. See also Beard and Bagley, History of the American People, pp. 156-57; Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, pp. 200, 215; West, History of the American People, p. 235; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, History of the United States for Schools, pp. 175-76; Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 139, 142. 8 Halleck, History of Our Country, pp. 196, 210. 7 Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States, pp. 134-35. 50 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS Washington could have held his army together during the latter years but for French gold."8 As a result of the French alliance, England found herself without an ally, according to West, for Spain and Holland fol- lowed the lead of France.9 Without an ally, England found herself facing not only her own colonies, but the three greatest naval powers of the world (next to herself), while most of the rest of Europe, under the lead of Russia, held toward her an attitude of "armed neutrality" — which meant instant readiness for hostility at the slightest opening.10 But West goes on to say that "to large numbers of patriots, even the news of the new ally was of doubtful cheer. Many began to fear they had only exchanged the petty annoyances of English rule for the slavery of French despotism and of the Spanish In- quisition."1 Further gratitude to France is aroused in the readers of the histories when they read of Lafayette, who "rendered services of the greatest value to our country."12 He is the "Good Samari- tan who not only gave his services freely but also spent nearly half a million dollars of his own money to assist her [Amer- ica]."13 The brief naval war of 1798 is mentioned by many of the textbooks, although in general not much space is devoted to it. It was a war in which "about eighty French privateers were cap- 8Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, p. 175. See also Beard, History of the United States, pp. 131-32; Stephenson, A School History of the United States, p. 198. •West, op. cit., pp. 235-36. 10 Ibid. "Ibid., p. 236. 12 Burnham, op. cit., p. 145. See also Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, p. 180; McMaster, A School History of the United States, p. 149; Evans, The Essential Facts of American History, p. 204; Elson, op. cit., p. 155; Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, p. 177; Estill, Beginner's History of Our Country, p. 166; Beard, op. cit., p. 121; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, History of the United States, p. 159; Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, p. 187; Halleck,; op. cit., p. 196; Gordy, Stories of Later American History, pp. 67-69. "Halleck, op. cit., p. 196. FRANCE AND THE UNITED STATES 51 tured," according to The Story of Our American People, and one in which "Napoleon found us no such easy victims as he had expected." Here again the Americans demonstrated a prowess in arms and an invincibility surprising to the foe, according to Home.14 Prior to the quasi-outbreak of hostilities — such as they were — the episode of Genet is chronicled; Genet, who had been sent to "bully us into the conflict" between England and France.15 The attitude of the Directorate toward American commissioners at Paris is said by Long and others to have given cause for "des- ultory conflict," which "went on at sea for two years, without a declaration of war on either side." This had come about, ac- cording to Long, because "there could be no dealing with such a government of scoundrels."16 "She [France] insulted the national dignity by offering, through her ministers, to bribe certain envoys whom the United States sent to her to settle the differences between the two coun- tries," the child is told in Fite's The United States.™ "England, indeed, treated us with more consideration than before; but France seemed utterly regardless of how she abused a young nation whom she did not fear, and she was now wroth with the United States because the government had come to terms without her august sanction," says McLaughlin, in speaking of the period directly following Jay's Treaty.18 This author also goes on to point out: French war ships ruthlessly plundered American merchantmen. They had not, on the whole, done so much damage as the English men-of-war, but that was not because the French naval officers lacked the will and desire, but was due to the fact that France was less 14 Home, The Story of Our American People, II, 46-47. 15 Long, op. cit., p. 238. 16 Ibid., pp. 239-40. Beard and Bagley, op. cit., p. 199. Other references are found in preceding footnotes. Scarcely a history textbook fails to pre- sent the points at issue in much this manner. 17 Fite, The United States, p. 205. 18 McLaughlin, op. cit., pp. 216-17. 52 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS powerful on the sea than England, and was less capable of injuring neutral commerce.19 The attitude of France toward the Jay Treaty, according to Elson, "nearly brought on war." The treatment of Pinckney, followed by the X Y Z affair and preceded by the Genet episode, as chronicled by this author and others, are not, in any sense, laudatory of France. These accounts may register in the pupil's mind an aversion for the French, but when war was declared in 1812 it was another than France, the pupil is made to realize, who became our antagonist. It is a pretty safe assumption that diplomatic negotiations of even the most unfriendly nature do not impress so profoundly as the assembling of armies and at- tendant descriptions of actual warfare.20 The archtraitor of French perfidy is Napoleon if one reads the histories right. "In his direct relations with the United States," says Hart in his School History of the United States, "Napoleon always showed himself slippery and false. He had not the least idea of courtesy or of keeping promises ; hence the Americans often suffered in their dealings with him."2 Few textbooks mention the spoliation claims and the settle- ment obtained by Jackson. The treatment of this international difficulty is in terms which would engender no animus to France.22 ™ Ibid., p. 216. See section on England. Barnes, Short American History by Grades, pp. 127 ff.; Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 217-24; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, op. cit., pp. 243 ff.; Gordy, History of the United States, pp. 197 ff. ; West, op. cit., pp. 34 ff. 20 Elson, op. cit., pp. 221-22; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, pp. 198, 200 ff.; Channing, Elements of United States History, pp. 193, 201; Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, pp. 245-46; Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 232; Burnham, op. cit., pp. 206 ff. 21 Hart, School History of the United States, p. 192. See also among others, Vollentine, The Making of America, p. 135; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 197; Gordy, History of the United States, p. 223; McLaughlin, op. cit., pp. 241-42; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 221; McMaster, op. cit., pp. 229-30; Mace, School History of the United States, pp. 244-^5; Baldwin, The Story of Liberty, pp. 233-34; Thompson, op. cit., p. 209. 22 See, for example, Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 371; Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 316; Franciscan Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration, A History of the United States, p. 340; Hart, New American History, p. 333. FRANCE AND THE UNITED STATES 53 The attitude of France in the Civil War receives somewhat casual treatment, and far less space than that devoted to Eng- land. In general it is stated that France was favorable to the South for economic reasons and because of her desire for terri- tory in Mexico. In the discussions relating to the latter point, attention is directed to the Maximilian affair, and here the pupil sees not so much hostile action on the part of France as a triumph of the Monroe Doctrine.23 Little is made of the attitude of France during the Spanish- American War. Long holds a unique place among writers be- cause of his statement that Germany and France united in 1913 to object to American control of affairs in Haiti.24 In the entrance of the United States into the World War and the active assistance rendered on the field of battle, it is frequently said that in this way we hoped "to pay the debt to Lafayette."2' "A part of the meaning of this event," says Mace in speaking of the visit of Viviani, Joffre, and Balfour to this country, "lies in the fact that France in our Revolution sent over Lafayette, De Kalb and Rochambeau. They came to aid Washington in winning our independence. America went to the aid of France and the world in the war for democracy."26 France gave our soldiers a welcome which made every true Ameri- can proud that we were at last repaying our debt to the land of Lafayette and Rochambeau, the France which had given its blood and treasure to make our country free [declares Guitteau]. Now the young giant of the West was sending its best manhood to fight with France and England and Italy to rescue Europe from the black des- potism which hung over the whole world like a pall. For wherever liberty and self-government had developed whether in France, or in 23 See, for example : Guitteau, Our United States, pp. 480-81 ; Beard, op. cit., pp. 478, 479; Long, op. cit., pp. 383-84. 24 Long, op. cit., p. 479. Guitteau, for example, mentions that "both Ger- many and France demanded that they be allowed to take control of the customs houses," due to Haiti's financial collapse, and that the United States took over the customs administration to prevent Haiti from passing into the control of her European creditors. 25 Home, op. cit., II, 423. 26 Mace, op. cii., p. 476. 54 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS England, or in the distant Orient, or in South America, there the Im- perial German government had been its foe.27 Throughout the narrative in comparison with the blackness of Germany's crimes, the action of France in the war is painted a spotless white. France, in accepting a "war which was thrust upon her," gained the "instant and overwhelming" admiration of the world, according to Fite. Dash and bravery and wonderful skill in the art of war were hers.28 Surely textbooks in American history are not anti-French.29 2TGuitteau, op. cit., p. 593. 28 Fite, The United States, p. 424. 29 It seems unnecessary to duplicate quotations to prove this point. A glance at any of the histories most frequently used will prove it. CHAPTER IV GERMANY IN AMERICAN HISTORY TEXTBOOKS Little space is accorded Germany and her people in American histories prior to our entrance into the World War. Few authors devote any considerable discussion to German immigrants and their contributions to the United States or to diplomatic relations between this country and Germany. Few concepts regarding Germany, as a result, could have been built up in the pupil's mind, so that the chief attitudes formed by reading the text- books will be those of Germany as an enemy of the most unscru- pulous kind. It should be said, however, that as colonials of the eighteenth century the Germans are described as "quiet, hardworking, fru- gal and thrifty." "They were very poor when they arrived in America," says Burnham, "but their industrious habits soon brought them prosperity. They were a religious people, honest in their dealings and contented in spirit."1 "Clannishness" is also at- tributed to them. This same author in his discussion of early Ger- mans declares that "they wished to remain German and conse- quently they clung tenaciously to the customs, language and literature of their fatherland."2 According to Beard, Their clannish habits often irritated their neighbors and led to occasional agitations against "foreigners." However, no serious col- lisions seem to have occurred; and in the days of the Revolution, German soldiers from Pennsylvania fought in the patriot armies side by side with soldiers from the English and Scotch-Irish sections."3 In the Revolutionary War, the employment of German mer- cenaries by England reflects upon the English rather than placing the Germans in an unfavorable light. Most textbooks mention the Hessians, but in a manner not to discredit them. 1 Burnham, The Making of Our Country, p. 66. 2 Ibid. See also Hulbert, United States History, p. 70; Fish, History of America, p. 98; Beard, History of the United States, p. 10. •Beard, op. cit. 55 56 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS Among the heroic figures of the war is Baron von Steuben, whose services are extolled in many books. In fact, most authors give the impression that to him is due the credit for providing America with an army able to use the bayonet in a skilful man- ner. But thanks to the skill of a noble Prussian officer, Baron Steuben, there came forth from that winter of gloom and suffering (1777— 1778) a new and well-trained army [declares Mace in his School His- tory of the United States}. From the first, Washington had had a hard task to drill his men, for they were mostly militia serving for a short time only and did not like the strict rules of military life. They were the best marksmen in the world, as the British learned on many a battlefield, but they liked the Indian method of fighting, each man for himself Steuben, fresh from the army of Frederick the Great, taught the Continentals the fine maneuvers of the Prussian soldiers and the skillful use of the bayonet.4 Nor are the services of De Kalb forgotten, who "fell in battle while fighting gallantly for our independence."5 From this point there is practically no mention of Germany until the time of the World War, except references to the Samoan incident, the German attitude toward the Spanish- American War, and the Venezuelan affair, and these do not appear in all the textbooks. It should be said that few writers of American his- tories do as Bourne and Benton have done in their History of the United States in devoting space to a discussion of affairs in Europe during the revolutionary era there. From a reading of these events in this book, however, the pupil would gather the impression of Germany as a land-grabbing nation, totally oblivi- 4 Mace, School History of the United States, pp. 178-79. See also Elson, The United States: Its Past and Present, p. 155; Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, p. 184; Barnes, Short American History for Grades, pp. 76-77; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, A History of the United States for Schools, p. 178. 6 Burnham, The Making of Our Country, p. 145. See also Beard and Bagley, History of the American People, pp. 165-66; Thwaites and Kendall, A History of the United States, pp. 175-76; Channing, Elements of United States History, p. 161; Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, p. 187. These are typical. GERMANY AND AMERICA 57 ous to the rights of sister-nations, bent upon dominance by mili- tary force. This new Empire was far different [from what the Revolutionists of 1848 had dreamed of] — it was built on military force. Bismarck, the minister of the Prussian King, once said that "iron and blood/' rather than fine speeches, were the surest means of getting what the Prussians wanted. The first act of the new Empire was to tear from France, which had been badly defeated in the war, two border lands, Alsace and a part of Lorraine.6 In his discussions preceding the World War, Guitteau, in a chapter entitled "Democracy on Trial in the World War," has ascribed a policy of "aggressive wars" to Bismarck in his attempt to place Prussia in the ascendancy. Out of these three successful wars, says Guitteau, Modern Germany emerged with boundaries greatly enlarged, and with an implicit belief in war and military force as the best means of advancing her national power. Bismarck's policy appeared fully vin- dicated, although it was a policy of fraud and trickery as well as of blood and iron. Bismarck had muzzled the press of Prussia, bullied its parliament, and overridden the will of its people; but Germany readily forgave his methods in view of the great material gains from his policy.7 The Samoan dispute, usually discussed as a gesture of Ameri- can interest in the Pacific, is ascribed by Guitteau to "Germany's jealousy of our growing power" there.8 Other authors recount that "serious difficulties arose between the representatives of the two nations" and that men-of-war were dispatched to the island to support the contending nations.9 By still other authors the dispute is said to have been attended by an "alarm" of the Unit- ed States and England as to the extension of German power in 6 Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, p. 411. • 7 Guitteau, Our United States, pp. 569-70. *Ibid., p. 485. 9 Franciscan Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration, A History of the United States for Catholic Schools, p. 513. See also Hall, Smither, and Ousley, A History of the United States, p. 419; Fite, History of the United States, p. 483; Hulbert, op. cit., pp. 483-84: Muz/.ey, An American History, p. 434. 58 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS the Pacific.10 On the other hand, Thompson and others merely mention the treaty agreement made between the powers by which six islands of the Samoan group fell to the United States.11 International incidents attending the Spanish- American War are another source of German hostility to the United States, because in this war, "Germany had shown much sympathy for Spain, and the German commander at Manila, Admiral von Died- rich .... acted toward Americans in a most disagreeable and irritating manner."12 By textbook writers von Diedrich is said to have "repeatedly disregarded the American patrol regulations, and finally landed supplies for the Spaniards in flat opposition to the American blockade." This led to "a brusque protest" from Dewey, and the message to the German commander "that if he wants a fight, he can have it now."13 The reaction of Dewey to the attitude of Germany in the war with Spain, as evinced in the Manila episode, is discussed by Mark Sullivan in his popularly written history, The Turn of the Century, as one of the causes of the adulation heaped upon Dewey. It is mentioned in this study merely to show the trend of the fancies of the American people at the time, kindled in no small degree by such a poem as "Hoch ! der Kaiser !" which ends each stanza with the well-known line of "Myself — und Gott."1 It is a question whether in the people's minds the episode at Ma- nila and the general attitude of Germany are associated with a resentment toward the hostility shown the American cause, or whether they merely increase the respect which Americans are 10 Beard and Bagley, op. cit., p. 546. Other authors, Muzzey, for example, mention at this point the growth of German colonial power. "Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 450; Mc- Carthy, History of the United States, p. 439; Burnham, op. cit., p. 563; Gordy, History of the United States, p. 430; Garner and Henson, op. cit., pp. 508-9, 538;, Robbins, School History of the United States, p. 467. "West, History of the American People, p. 635. 13 Ibid. See also Fite, op. cit., p. 500; Guitteau, History of the United States, p. 561; Latane", History of the United States, p. 502; Halleck, History of Our Country, p. 436. "Mark Sullivan, Our Times: The United States 1900-1925, Vol. I: The Turn of the Century (New York, 1926), pp. 327-29. GERMANY AND AMERICA 59 said to have for themselves. Possibly the attitude of Germany would have made slight impression upon the readers of those histories in which it is described if it had not been for the par- ticipation of the United States in the World War, in the dis- cussions of which all evidences of German hostility and perfidy are assembled. It is certain that Germany in this incident is not made a conspicuous culprit by many textbook writers.15 One other incident attesting a strained relationship between the two countries may be mentioned before the World War en- gages our attention. It is the Venezuelan dispute of 1901, in which Great Britain willingly accepted but Germany "refused" arbitration.16 It is in discussions attending this incident that Germany is said to have regarded the Monroe Doctrine as a piece of "international impertinence" and to have remained for several days after Roosevelt's demand for the withdrawal of her ships from Venezuelan waters. When withdrawal did take place, it is attributed to the fact that "the American navy at that time was more than a match for the German navy, and it was near at hand in West Indian waters."17 Some textbooks do not men- tion the incident at all,18 while others point out only the influence of Roosevelt in effecting a settlement through arbitration, and the episode as an indication of the development of the Monroe Doctrine.19 15 See the sections devoted to England for the mention of England's attitude as contrasted with Germany's in the Spanish-American War. "Forman, Advanced American History, p. 542. "Ibid. See also Home, Story of Our American People, II, 870-71; Latane, op. cit., p. 525; Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 574; Stephenson, A School History of the United States, p. 432; Halleck, op. cit., p. 490; Beard, op. cit., p. 512. In these books the attitude of Germany is mentioned as changing after the statement of the president that a fleet would appear and force settlement. 18 McLaughlin, History of the American Nation; Evans, The Essential Facts of American History; Long, America; Gordy, History of the United States; Fish, op. cit.; Channing, A Students' History of the United States; Beard and Bagley, op. cit.; Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades; Robbins, op. cit.; Muzzey, op. cit. "Burnham, op. cit., p. 557; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 460; Mace and Bogardus, School History of the United States, p. 384; Hart, New American History, p. 608. 60 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS In discussing the World War, no authors adopt the revision- ist point of view regarding the war guilt. The nearness of the event to the present, moreover, doubtless colors the treatment in such a way that Germany appears designing, crafty, cruel, mili- taristic, egotistical, and totally regardless of the rights of other nations. Many books deal with her imperialism and dream of world-empire, her idea of race superiority, her militarism, the disregard of international law culminating in such incidents as the Lusitania affair, and her alleged "atrocities." Few treat of the hidden forces making of Europe an armed camp before 1914. In the half century that followed the Franco-Prussian War, the German people patiently endured the burden of immense standing armies and the expenditures for a greater navy [declares Guitteau]. They accepted this situation because they had been carefully educated to look upon war as something inevitable, as necessary to the future greatness of Germany. The schools throughout the empire distorted the facts of history and geography to teach the children of Germany that France was a nation of weaklings, Russia a nation of slaves ; that most of the peoples of Europe were descended from Germans, and should be united within the empire; and finally that Germany must have larger boundaries, a result which could only be accomplished by a victorious war "Might makes right," said the German mili- tarist, "and the dispute as to what is right is to be decided by war." Along with this doctrine that might makes right, that war is "a beautiful and holy thing," the Germans were taught .... that the German race is a race of superior beings as compared with other peoples; that its civilization (Kultur) is superior to all other civili- zations; and hence it is the duty of Germany to civilize and German- ize the world ! . . . . It is not strange that this people, feeling them- selves to be superior beings, came to believe that Germany did not possess the colonies, the commerce, and the influence which such a superior nation ought to have.20 It is worth while to continue the quotation from this author: Inspired by these ideals, the military party which ruled Germany had for many years planned an aggressive war which should give Germany her place as the foremost world power. Not content with the provinces of Alsace-Lorraine which she had wrested from France 20 Guitteau, Our United States, pp. 570-71. GERMANY AND AMERICA 61 in 1871, Germany planned in this new war to steal the northeastern portion of France and to annex the whole of Belgium. This would give her immense fields of coal and iron ore, so necessary for industry, and especially for the manufacture of armaments, while the seizure of the Channel ports would enable her to hold a dagger at the heart of England. For Britain, with her world empire, was the enemy which Germany expected to attack eventually, although she hoped that this would be in a later war after France and Russia were crushed And after Britain, then America, peace-loving, ideal- istic, defenseless America, might be taken in hand, and taught her proper and subordinate place in a world ruled by German power This ambitious program was not the dream of a few German vision- aries or jingoes. It was an actual plan, carefully worked out in detail by the war-mad clique which ruled Germany. The German people, it is true, were not consulted in the matter ; there was no need to consult them, for Germany was ruled not by her people, but by the Kaiser supported by the military leaders and the Prussian aristoc- racy. So audacious and so insolent is this German plan of world power that it startles our belief; yet in the fateful year of 1914 it came near to realization Only the heroic resistance of the little Belgian army, the defeat of the German hordes by France in the battle of the Marne, and England's unbroken power on the sea, pre- vented Germany's dream of world empire from becoming an accom- plished fact.21 Evans' textbook is taken as typical of the greater number of histories and the quotations presented may be considered as representative. In explaining the background of the war, there is emphasized the "wrong done to France" in the taking of Alsace-Lorraine by Germany, the lack of liberalism in Germany's government and the power of the upper classes, her militarism, her desire for more territory and greater trade, her hatred of England, the Berlin- to-Bagdad Railway, her desire to Germanize the world, and to spread abroad German Kultur.22 "The increasing military prep- arations of Germany," the other nations regarded "with much distrust," as it compelled them "to sustain armies and navies in ever growing proportion and expense, until for many years there 21 Ibid., pp. 571-73. "Evans, op. cit., pp. 486-89. 62 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS was a heavy burden of taxation, a feverish haste of armament, and a spirit of oppressive militarism that boded ill for the world." The summary of causes for the World War is here reproduced, since it sets forth the reasons ascribed by most of our textbook writers : The world at large has laid upon Germany the charge of prepar- ing for and precipitating the World War. The charges against that nation are: 1. Forty years of preparation in creating tremendous armaments and collecting vast supplies. 2. Justification and glorification of war on the part of her states- men, writers, orators, and teachers. 3. Formation of the Triple Alliance, as a league of defense in case of attack by an outside nation. 4. Hostility to any purpose of the Hague Conference to limit armaments and to prevent war. 5. The expressed determination of Germany to gain more terri- tory, dominate Middle Europe, and control the commerce of the world.23 Garner and Henson, Bourne and Benton, Stephenson, Thomp- son, Halleck, Bobbins, Muzzey, Burnham, and Barnes offer typical treatments and follow in general the foregoing quota- tions.24 In these discussions Germany is described as "a despotic colossus bent on destroying free government throughout the world" ;25 a nation making war "the holiest and noblest human activity";26 a country who had "robbed" Denmark of her rich provinces of Schleswig and Holstein, who "tore" Alsace and Lorraine from France, and had made "war her glory and am- bition her desire."27 One author points out how "in former times 23 Ibid., p. 490. 24 Garner and Henson, op. cit., pp. 590 ff.; Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, pp. 498 ff.; Stephenson, op. cit., pp. 442 ff.; Thompson, First Book in United States History, pp. 386-89; Halleck, op. cit., pp. 501 ff.; Robbins, School History of the American People, pp. 496-98; Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 497 ff.; Burnham, op. cit., pp. 573 ff.; Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, pp. 397 ff. 25 Stephenson, op. cit., p. 443. 26 Halleck, op. cit., p. 501. 27Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 511. GERMANY AND AMERICA 63 Germans were admired for their work in science, philosophy, literature, and music," but how "success in industry and com- merce" made them "regard as the highest aim the accumulation of material riches."28 In the conduct of the war they are charged with "deliberately" adding to the "horrors" of war, of carrying "frightfulness into warfare on the sea, where fighting, terrible as it might be, had always been done with knightly courage and noble courtesy."2 "Because of this return to the savagery of the barbarians from whom she sprang, by the end of 1916 Germany had for- feited the respect of every civilized nation, and henceforth the war became a crusade to rid the world of her militarism," is the assertion of Garner and Henson.30 The introduction of "huge new guns and high explosives," the use of poison gas in April, 1915, added "a new horror in warfare."31 German perfidy and cruelty were likewise demonstrat- ed in the invasion of Belgium, whose neutrality "had been guaran- teed by a solemn treaty signed by the great powers of Europe, Germany included." In their invasion of Belgium the Germans called this treaty "a scrap of paper," and spread "desolation and destruction on every hand." The "superb and inspiring resistance" offered by the Belgians "angered" the Germans to such a degree that "they wreaked a terrible vengeance," frightening the Bel- gians into submission by "a systematic policy of 'frightfulness.' ' They brought "suffering, starvation and death" to "innocent victims, to women and children as well as to men."32 28 Thompson, History of the People of the United States, pp. 469-70. 29 Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, p. 509. 30 Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 629. 31 West, op. cit., p. 709; Evans, op. cit., p. 500. 32Woodburn and Moran, Elementary American History and Government, pp. 443-44. The invasion of Belgium is uniformly criticized. See, as typical, McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 506; Forman, op. cit., p. 577; Stephenson, op. cit., p 434; Eggleston, First Book in American History, pp. 209-10; Beard and Bagley, op. cit., p. 616; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, pp. 486-87. 64 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS It was this "brutal invasion of Belgium" which brought Eng- land into the struggle, declares West : Germany had been certain that "shop-keeping" England would not fight. This was her first fatal blunder. And the consciousness that she had blundered called out, not a just contempt for her own government and its spies who had mastered her, but a frenzy of hate for England — whose overthrow in a later war, she now openly de- clared, had been her goal all along.33 Germany's faults shine all the more brightly in contrast with the virtues of Belgium, whose "brave" and "devoted" army held in check the Kaiser's "ruthless invaders."3 [ The "heroic" French, too, "skillfully against overwhelming odds," with the help of England's "eager volunteers," saved "Western freedom and civili- zation .... from a towering despotism."3 Thus "this terrible world-war, especially on the west front, was waged in terrible ways new to the world." For the Germans pursued a "policy of Fright fulness (Schrecklichkeit) deliber- ately adopted by the German government." The reader is then told: Official authority in Germany for this policy dates from 1900. In that year a force of German soldiers set out to join forces from other European countries and from the United States in restoring order in China, after the massacre of Europeans there in the Boxer Rebellion. July 27 the Kaiser bade his troops farewell at Bremer- haven in a set address. In the course of that brutal speech he com- manded them: "Show no mercy ! Take no prisoners ! As the Huns made a name for themselves which is still mighty in tradition, so may you by your deeds so fix the name of German in China that no Chinese shall ever again dare to look at a German askance Open the way for Kultur."36 33 West, op. tit., pp. 707-8. 34 Evans, op. cit., p. 494; West, op. cit., p. 708; Burnham, op. cit., p. 575. 35 West, op. cit., p. 708. 36 A footnote at this point injects the statement, "The Germans made a number of savage 'punitive expeditions' for booty and rapine. In these they indulged not merely in indiscriminate murder of non-combatants, but even in many indescribable outrages upon women." The footnote adds that these outrages were stopped at the insistence of the American commander (ibid., p. 710). GERMANY AND AMERICA 65 Now this Hun policy was put into effect in Western Europe. Never since the ancient blood-spattered Assyrian monarchs stood exultingly on pyramids of mangled corpses had the world seen so huge a crime. Belgium and northeastern France were devastated. Whole villages of innocent non-combatants were wiped out — men, women, children — burned in their houses or shot and bayoneted if they crept forth. All this by deliberate order of the "high command," and not to gain any military advantage, but, like the frightfulness of the old Assyrians, to terrify neighboring peoples — Dutch, Danes, Swiss — so that they might not dare risk a like fate. About all this there is absolutely no doubt. Of course the German soldiery became brutalized, so that, with or without orders they com- mitted thousands of nameless outrages upon women and Sioux-Indian mutilations upon captives. In like fashion, too, zeppelins raided Eng- land, partly to destroy military depots, but chiefly to drop bombs upon resident parts of London and upon peaceful villages So, too, the Germans deliberately bombed hospitals and Red Cross trains, murdering not only wounded soldiers but also the doctors and nurses. And soon the German submarine began to torpedo hospital ships, clearly marked as such. Nor is it easy to find any imaginable crime against the war customs of all civilized nations that was not committed and boasted of by Germany within a few months after this war began.37 Following discussions of America's effort to be neutral, come those telling of German spies and agents in the United States, the Zimmerman note, and the difficulties rising out of the sub- marine policy — a policy characterized as "barbarous"38 and filled with "frightfulness,"39 but upheld by Germany to the degree that "medals were struck to commemorate" the torpedoing of the Lusitania.40 These violations of neutrality and the invasion of Belgium led people "to see that the nation responsible for what was happening there could not possibly be right. "4L Because of these things, "the spirit of justice" led us to embark upon a "great 37 Ibid., pp. 710-11. The copyright of this book is 1918. Therefore, it is plain that it is a product of the war period. 38 Ibid., p. 714. 39 Guitteau, History of the United States, p. 605. 40Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 451. "Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 513. 66 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS American Crusade," for in it "we were truly battling for the cause of humanity."42 A "love of fair play" had developed in the American people "sympathy for the Allies which Germany and Austria found so hard to understand,"43 and we had come "to be- lieve with the English and the French that Germany was aiming at world-dominion, as Assyria and Rome had done in the past."44 Thus were we driven into war.45 In the active participation on the battlefield, throughout, the American forces did their share. For example, in the battle of the Argonne, they "carried on" despite "terrible slaughter." They scarcely even hoped to come out alive; yet they fought on- ward with unyielding courage, unbroken devotion, till they captured the entire region of the Argonne Beyond the Argonne, our troops pushed on with swifter success, until they reached and con- trolled the main railroad by which Germany carried supplies to her foremost lines On November 6, our men's desperate advance brought them at last upon the heights above the city of Sedan The whole German army was retreating across the frontier into Bel- gium and Germany, beaten back from its prey by American arms. That was a great day for our unwarlike nation.46 Thus the Americans had a share in "democracy's victory."47 Indeed, "our soldiers had fought gallantly, and had made pos- sible the victory in the most stupendous conflict of history,"4 for "we stood forth as no feeble foe to match even the terrible German colossus."4 As the preceding narrative will clearly prove, few books used in our schools can be charged with pro-Germanism. Even Long, in his America, and Bourne and Benton, in their recent American History, who are among the few who explain that "the causes of the Great War were not new but old, not one but many,"50 make 42 Home, op. cit., II, 415. ** Elson, op. cit., p. 521. 43 Long, op. cit., p. 486. ** Gordy, op. cit., p. 503. 46 Home, op. cit., II, 435-37. 47Guitteau, Our United States, p. 617. ^Guitteau, History of the United States, p. 638. "Home, op. cit., II, 422. 60 The statement of Long, op. cit., p. 482. GERMANY AND AMERICA 67 the German military leaders responsible for the war. As the pupil reads the textbooks found most frequently in the schools, he cannot help feeling as one author puts it, "Thus did Germany commit the greatest crime of modern times, to the indignation and astonishment of the entire world."61 51 Evans, op. cit., p. 493. In reality the quotation applies to the invasion of Belgium. In order to make clear the position of Long as to war guilt, the following quotation is given: "German military leaders are blamed for the war, and their guilt is plain; but it should be remembered that other nations than Germany, aiming to dominate Europe by force, had all alike waged wars of conquest; that the diplomacy which governed their relations was a maze of trickery, double dealing, wickedness and folly; that all their frontiers bristled with guns; that the whole continent was like a number of military camps, watchful and suspicious, in which a slight difference might at any moment lead to clash of arms. "Inevitably, therefore, the causes of the Great War were not new but old, not one but many. It was started by Austria-Hungary; but behind it were national jealousies and hatreds, bitter memories, selfish ambitions, greed of colonies, lust of power, — a host of evil conditions that do not affect America and that our people cannot by experience understand" (Long, op. cit., p. 482). CHAPTER V THE RELATION OF THE UNITED STATES TO COUN- TRIES OF THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE CANADA Little space is devoted to the relations of the United States and Canada in our school histories. This lack of attention may be due to the friendly contacts which have existed for the greater part of our history. One can arrive at this conclusion easily when he considers that those nations to whom the thoughts of readers of textbooks are directed most often are those nations with whom the United States has at some time been at war, or with whom diplomatic controversies have arisen. "Our relations with Canada have always been friendly but might well have been more intimate," is the view of Woodburn and Moran, in their Elementary American History and Govern- ment. "We have racial and geographical interests in common and it seems a pity in some respects that the reciprocity treaties failed of ratification."1 This excerpt will show the character of discussions when there are any relating to Canadian-American relations, aside from those treated in the section devoted to Eng- land. It may not be inappropriate at this point to recall state- ments in some of the textbooks relative to the friendly relations which have persisted between the two peoples, mentioned previ- ously.2 Typical of these is the following from Elson's United States: Its Past and Present: "Yet for a hundred years the two nations, without a fortress or a soldier or a warship have de- veloped side by side in the most friendly relations. Why should not other nations learn a lesson from this?"3 1 Woodburn and Moran, Elementary American History and Government, p. 615. 2 See, for example, p. 41. 3Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, p. 289. UNITED STATES AND WESTERN COUNTRIES 69 MEXICO Turning to the nearest neighbor at the south, the reader of textbooks will find a different attitude than that taken toward Canada. Because American arms have been successful there, be- cause our relationship with Mexico has included far more inter- national discord than with Canada, and because of the character of the people, the pupil will glean from his textbooks many facts pregnant with dislike. The treatment of intercourse between the United States and Mexico is not uniform in the histories most commonly used. This is particularly true of discussions pertaining to the Mexican War. West, for example, characterizes the war as "unjust,"4 whereas Muzzey takes the opposite view, declaring that "Mexico had insulted our flag, plundered our commerce, imprisoned our citizens, lied to our representatives, and spurned our envoys," and that, as early as 1837, President Jackson had said that Mexico's offenses "would justify in the eyes of all nations im- mediate war."5 Thus, authors of textbooks can be said to be divided into two schools of thought exemplified by these scholars. Few his- torians put the matter as do McLaughlin and Van Tyne, in A History of the United States for Schools: There is still room for question as to whether we were right in fighting Mexico, and scholars differ. Our patience was sorely tried, but a little fairness, a little more patience, and a little more generosity might have made war unnecessary. Folk's method of blaming Mexico reminds one of a soldier who came into camp with a dead sheep over 4 West, History of the American People, pp. 517-18. See, for a similar point of view, Barnes, Short American History for Grades; Fite, History of the United States; Thwaites and Kendall, A History of the United States; Franciscan Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration, A History of the United States; Hart, New American History; Channing, A Students' History of the United States. 8 Muzzey, An American History, pp. 279-80. See also Bourne and Benton, American History; Long, America; Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States. In the case of the last textbook, the war is not condoned but it is not condemned, nor is the opposition argument to the war presented. 70 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS his shoulder, though foraging was forbidden. "No sheep can bite me and live," he said.6 Similar in spirit to the McLaughlin and Van Tyne discus- sion is the middle ground taken by Beard, Woodburn and Moran, Stephenson, and Hulbert. By these historians both sides of the question are given in order that the pupil may draw his own conclusion. In addition to other facts commonly presented, Guit- teau traces the strained relations which for some time had existed between the two countries prior to the outbreak of the war, declaring that "war might not have resulted if other differences between the two countries had not existed." This author explains to the reader: American citizens living in Mexico had suffered enormous losses as a result of the frequent revolutions and chaotic conditions there; and for twenty years our government vainly sought reparation Mexico [on the other hand] charged the United States with repeated violations of neutrality during the Texan revolution, and she persist- ently refused to recognize the independence of Texas, even nine years after the event. Meantime Texas had been) recognized as an independ- ent nation by the United States and by the leading nations of Europe. The independence of Texas was an accomplished fact, and Mexico's claim to her former province had nothing to rest upon. The reason why Texas was not annexed at an earlier date was not diplomatic, but political; it was due to the institution of slavery and to North- ern opposition to the acquisition of more slave territory.7 The pupil reading different textbooks would find a difference of opinions among authors as to the cause of the war. Whereas Bourne and Benton, for example, declare that "annexation alone would probably not have brought on a war with Mexico," Vol- lentine asserts that annexation was the cause of the war.8 Long, in his America, however, presents the question of the real bound- ary thus: The United States had fair claim to Texas as a part of Louisi- 6 McLaughlin and Van Tyne, A History of the United States for Schools, p. 323, footnote. TGuitteau, History of the United States, p. 348. "Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, p. 315; Vollentine, The Making of America, p. 219. UNITED STATES AND WESTERN COUNTRIES 71 ana; but statesmen knew little about the region when to soothe Span- ish feeling after the Florida trouble, they allowed Spain to fix the Sabine River as the western limit of the great territory, despite old maps which showed the Rio Grande as the boundary.9 In the actual combats between the Americans and Mexicans, the former are said to have "won every battle"10 in "the short war [in which] our countrymen displayed striking qualities."11 To Taylor, familiarly known as "Old Rough and Ready,"12 who with "only two thousand troops" was able to drive "the much more numerous enemy" to retreat and [to] capture several cit- ies," are attributed "brilliant" victories.13 Fish, in his History of America, however, declares that "our regular army was very small, and the volunteers who flocked to the flag were ill-trained, and suffered from the change of climate."1 From the discussions of events during and prior to the war, readers of the textbooks will gather the impression that the Mex- icans were not only untrustworthy but cruel. The story of the Alamo alone would establish this opinion. Santa Anna, the new Mexican president, a man of perfidious and cruel character, led an army in person to punish the rebellious prov- ince [states Muzzey]. His march was marked with terrible atrocities. At the Alamo, a mission building in San Antonio, a garrison of 166 Texans was absolutely exterminated, even to the sick in the hospital ward; and a little further on, at Goliad the defenders were massacred in cold blood after their surrender.15 On the other hand, according to Long, Santa Anna was "gen- erously set free" by the Americans after being captured by the Americans. "Had he been shot for the Alamo massacre and 8 Long, op. cit., p. 313. 10Halleck, History of Our Country, p. 330. 11 McLaughlin and Van Tyne, op. cit., p. 323. See also Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 268. 12 Stephenson, A School History of the United States, p. 298. "Home, The Story of Our American People, II, 178. 14 Fish, History of America, 296. 15 Muzzey, op. cit., p. 269. Cruelty is attributed to Mexicans in other dis- cussions either directly or by inference. See, for instance, White, Beginner's History of the United States, pp. 191-92. 72 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS other barbarities, as he deserved, it would have spared Mexico and the United States much trouble," concludes this author.18 Lack of honesty, too, is attributed to the Mexicans by some writers, for "the Mexican border was a nest of bandits, who raided American settlements, stole cattle, killed men and women."17 In the .diplomatic relations which the United States had had, the reader is told by Hulbert, Mexico — running true to form — had been insultingly slow in set- tling claims due for the destruction of American lives and prop- erty Most of these differences ought to have been straightened out by diplomacy, but a century's experience has taught us that Mexi- cans are difficult to deal with!18 Attention, however, should be called to the statements in two histories, which do not paint the Mexicans as the meanest of villains and the most despicable of foes. West, in his History of the American People, at one place speaks of them as "both brave and subtle," and McCarthy, in his history, asserts that during the storming of Chapultepec, "Mexican cadets of fourteen years shared the horrors of war with the coolness of men."1 The next contact of significance for this study, as chronicled by the authors of history textbooks, is with the Mexicans in Wilson's administration. It was during this unsettled period of Mexican history that the textbooks tell of "much bloodshed."20 In this "turmoil many Americans living in Mexico were killed and their property destroyed."21 In "the spring of 1914," it is 16 Long, op. cit., p. 315. " Ibid., p. 321. 18 Hulbert, United States History, p. 287. 19 West, op. cit., p. 518; McCarthy, History of the United States for Catholic Schools, p. 321. 20Forman, Advanced American History, p. 576. Several histories merely state conditions without using colorful language. See, for instance, Thomp- son, History of the People of the United States, p. 466; Mace, School History of the United States, p. 471. 21 Ibid. See also discussions in Beard, History of the United States, pp. 594-96; Hulbert, op. cit., pp. 513-14; Gordy, History of the United States, pp. 452-53. Channing and McLaughlin in their textbooks omit this topic. UNITED STATES AND WESTERN COUNTRIES 73 frequently narrated, "several sailors belonging to our navy were arrested by the followers of Huerta and were roughly treated." It is further recorded that, in 1916, Villa, with "a band of out- laws," invaded New Mexico and "killed nine American citizens." Due to this act, a punitive expedition was sent by the United States to punish Villa, but it "accomplished but little."22 In this land of "anarchy," "a ruthless, dissipated, revolution- ary general, with Indian blood in his veins, fought his way to power — Victoriano Huerta, the reputed murderer of Madero."23 On April 9, 1914, sailors from an American ship landed at Tampico and were "seized" and carried off "to jail amid the hoots and jeers of the crowd," the reader of Muzzey's An Ameri- can History discovers. When a formal salute to the flag was asked for as an apology for "this insult," this author observes that Huerta refused to comply As a result, Congress was asked by President Wilson for permission to use force in order to "main- tain the dignity and authority of the United States." Following this, the pupil is informed of the loss of seventeen lives of the American marines sent to Mexico.24 The part of Germany in Mexican affairs at this time is men- tioned by some authors, one writer asserting that "the German government had bribed the Mexican revolutionists to attack the lives and property of our citizens in Mexico and along the border," and that "by involving the United States in a war with Mexico, the German government believed that our nation would be less able to defend itself against German outrages on the high 22 Ibid., pp. 576-77. See also Muzzey, op. cit., p. 494; McCarthy, History of the United States, pp. 459-60; Home, op. cit., II, 398-401. 23 Muzzey, op. cit., p. 493. 24 Ibid., p. 494. See also Robbins, School History of the American People, pp. 482-83; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, A History of the United States, pp. 458-60; Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, pp. 603-5. 25 Guitteau, Our United States, p. 552. See also Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 464; Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, p. 522; O'Hara, A History of the United States, p. 402. 74 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS The recent desire of some Americans for war with Mexico to satisfy American claims is mentioned by Beard.26 SOUTH AMERICA The contacts of the United States and the countries of South America are not only those which arise usually between neigh- boring nations, but they also embrace the results of the Monroe Doctrine. The Doctrine is discussed elsewhere as a part of our foreign policy. In this section it will not be dealt with primarily as a phase of the foreign policy of the United States as related to European powers, but as directly affecting South American political life. Described as effectually guarding "the gateway of the Western World for more than a hundred years,"27 the Monroe Doctrine, in general, appears the means of a protection afforded our south- ern neighbors. "The immediate effect [of the pronouncement]," according to Mace and Bogardus, "was to keep the peace With the exception of Maximilian in Mexico, the Monroe Doc- trine has kept out foreign nations and has given the nations to the south of us time to get on their feet."28 Indeed, as a doctrine "really intended for the protection of the weaker states," it has made the United States a benefactor of those states.29 As Home, in The Story of Our American People, puts it, "Much as the Latin Americans sometimes blame our people for having seized northern Mexico or Panama, or overridden them in other ways, we have clearly been a large factor in saving them from European conquest."30 Moreover, as the preservative of the spirit of liberty, the Monroe Doctrine has served, according to one historian, to demonstrate that "peculiar sympathy" which North America had for those "Spanish- American patriots fighting to make good their own independence."31 The "resentment" alleged to exist in the hearts of South Americans toward the people of the United States is not unnoted 26 Beard, op. cit., p. 625. 27 Elson, op. cit., p. 298. 28 Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 223. 29 Hart, School History of the United States, p. 454. 30 Home, op. cit., II, 28T. S1 Fite, op. cit., pp. 255-56. UNITED STATES AND WESTERN COUNTRIES 75 by writers of textbooks. The protection which the United States has given their countries is said by some writers to be the cause. It is accounted a perplexing and difficult bit of diplomacy in "awarding protection to South America" to "avoid wounding the pride of the younger nations, especially of the three powers of Argentine, Brazil, and Chile, the 'A. B. C.' powers of South America "S2 The Panama revolt is likewise held to have "caused serious ill-will through all South America." Roosevelt had highly pleased our Latin neighbors of the south by his defense of Venezuela. Now, his defiance of Colombia made them feel again, as in Mexico's case, that we were a bullying race, ready to snatch anything we wanted from the weak. They gave little heed to our plea that Colombia's renewed demand, after her rights had already been paid for by France wronged both the United States and Panama.33 Thus, many South Americans came to distrust us ; and "our successive Presidents all tried to restore harmony by satisfying Colombia," a gesture worth while because of "the good will we thus won from Colombia and from all South America."34 As another instance of hostility toward the United States, the Chilean episode in Harrison's administration is discussed, for, as McLaughlin puts it, the people of Chile "cherished resentment against Americans."35 Withal, the frequent meetings of Pan-American congresses and the formation of the Pan-American Union are deemed evidences of amity on the part of both continents. Characterized by Fite as "one of the finest signs of the times in the diplomacy of the twentieth century," Pan-American congresses are said to be pro- moting the "spirit of brotherhood among the independent Ameri- can republics."36 As a further token of increasing good will there is presented the instance of the mediation of the ABC powers 32 Ibid., p. 525. 33 Home, op. cit., II, 375. 34 Ibid., p. 467. 35 McLaughlin, History of the American Nation, p. 499. 36 Fite, The United States, p. 406. 76 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS in Mexican- American relations in the second decade of the pres- ent century.37 The increasing trade between North and South America is considered an advantage to both. Special pleas for a continu- ation and extension of trade and credits are voiced by some writers including Guitteau, Woodburn and Moran, Bourne and Benton.38 "We must know more of the people, industries, re- sources, and trade of the Latin- American republics to the south of us," declare Woodburn and Moran. "We have neglected them somewhat in the past. We are not so likely to do so in the future. We have vast interests in common with them. Pan-Americanism is a growing idea."3 "Ibid., p. 411. 38 Guitteau, Our United States, pp. 633-34; Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 670-71. a9 Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 514. CHAPTER VI RUSSIA IN UNITED STATES HISTORY TEXTBOOKS Very little attention is devoted to Russian- American relations in the study of American history, if one judge by the space al- lotment in those textbooks examined. The first instance of con- tacts chronicled by the histories is the warning issued Russia in the pronouncement of the Monroe Doctrine, for "Russia was attempting to extend its power on the Pacific coast south from Alaska as far as the fifty-first parallel, over a part of the terri- tory already claimed by both Great Britain and the United States."1 During the Civil War, the attitude of Russia in contradis- tinction to that of England and France is said by one author to be "the pleasantest feature of our foreign relations." The motives leading Czar Alexander to warn this country that "Na- poleon was conspiring with the British and Spanish governments to interfere in our war" are attributed to an interest in America's problem of negro slavery and the enmity of Russia toward France and England. Whether this timely show of friendliness [the appearance of a Russian fleet in New York Harbor] was accidental or purposeful was long debated on both sides of the ocean. It appears now that the "demonstration" was planned as a hint that, if France or Britain interfered in American affairs, they might have an enemy at their backs. It appears also that America paid (so far as gold can pay for anything more precious than gold) by adding the expenses of the fleet to the purchase price of Alaska.2 1 Fite, History of the United States, p. 257. See also Forman, Advanced American History, pp. 257-58; Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 271; Halleck, History of Our Country, p. 276; Thompson, A History of the People of the United States, p. 253; Thwaites and Kendall, A History of the United States, p. 250. 2 Long, America, p. 384. 77 78 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS Other authors speak of Russia in amicable terms. "Our good friend Russia,"3 "a stanch friend of the federal government,"4 a country having "a friendly disposition" toward the United States,5 and "extremely friendly" to "the cause of the Union."6 Not all textbooks mention the attitude of Russia toward the North.7 The czar of Russia as the instigator of the Hague Conference is mentioned in some of our textbooks.8 Such a laudable move, however, is counterbalanced by the later descriptions of some writers of Russia's defection in the World War, when Lenine and Trotsky as "false leaders completed the betrayal of their country by the shameful treaty of Brest-Litovsk ' Owing to Russia's surrender, it is said, Rumania was left "in a helpless position, surrounded by hostile powers."10 On coming into power in Russia [declares Guitteau], the Bolshe- viki, or extreme socialists, inaugurated a rule of violence and blood- shed. They abolished the most primitive forms of justice, and thou- sands of persons suspected of being unfriendly to Bolshevism were shot or hanged without the semblance of a trial. Every newspaper which did not favor the cause was suppressed; and the Constituent Assembly, an anti-Bolshevist body elected by the Russian people, was forcibly dissolved. 8Guitteau, Our United States, p. 481. 4 Robbins, School History of the American People, p. 345. 6 Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, p. 460. •Hart, New American History, p. 493. TMcLaughlin, History of the American Nation; Evans, The Essential Facts of American History; Gordy, History of the United States; Woodburn and Moran, Elementary American History and Government, do not discuss this point. 8Guitteau, History of the United States, p. 584; Fish, History of America, p. 530; Muzzey, An American History, p. 478; McLaughlin, History of the American Nation, p. 530; Beard, History of the United States, p. 514; Fite, op. cit., p. 517; Lawler, Essentials of American History, p. 422; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, A History of the United States, p. 442; Evans, op. cit., p. 489; McCarthy, History of the United States, p. 442; Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States, p. 382. "Guitteau, Our United States, p. 596; Guitteau, History of the United States, p. 620. See also McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 580; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 520. 10 Guitteau, History of the United States, p. 620. RUSSIA AND THE UNITED STATES 79 The Bolshevik! would not fight against the Germans, to whom they had surrendered one third of Russia's territory; but they were ready to fight and plunder their own countrymen Hundreds of thousands of lives were lost from starvation and disease, so that in the end the Bolshevist tyranny cost Russia more lives than the war itself. Not the least among the crimes of the Bolshevist leaders was their attempt to undermine the Governments of other countries, so as to bring on a universal revolution. To accomplish this they relied upon bomb outrages, the destruction of factories and material, and the stir- ring-up of class hatred An attempt was also made .... to undermine our own Government by the spread of Bolshevist doctrines in the United States. But the American Federation of Labor dealt a severe blow to the agitators when its national convention voted against the proposed general strike, and denounced the principles of Bolshevism.11 It will, therefore, be apparent that a reading of the textbooks will present Russia in a way to excite, on the whole, friendly sentiments before the opening of the World War. On the other hand, discussions dealing with Russia for the period since 1917 will doubtless arouse the opposite sentiments. 11 Ibid., pp. 644-45. See also Hulbert, United States History, p. 564; Home, The Story of Our American People, II, pp. 430-31; Mace, School History of the United States, p. 494. CHAPTER VII COUNTRIES OF THE FAR EAST IN AMERICAN HISTORIES CHINA In 1917, Timothy T. Lew published an investigation of text- books in history in common use in the American public schools, in order to determine to what extent Chinese-American relations were treated. His findings led him to conclude that, owing to the little attention given to this subject, indifference and prejudice might result. He further held that many events which might show cordial relations between the two nations did not appear in the books. He said: While the initiative, planning, constructive skill, — the brain power — as well as the financing, that has been devoted to the marvelous industrial development and westward expansion of the United States has been supplied by Americans and Europeans, the Chinese have not been without a share in the great work. Less conspicuous, less valuable and seldom honored it has been; yet nevertheless the faith- ful, plodding toil of thousands of unskilled Chinese laborers has gone into the railroads, highways, mines, cities and farms that have marked the geometric progression of America's industrial development Practically none of the authors whose textbooks we have examined give full credit to the contribution of Chinese labor in America.1 The same statement as to space allotment as to Chinese- American relations is true of those histories written since the World War. Taking, for example, ten of the most commonly used and most recently written or revised senior high school textbooks, the reader finds that topics relating to the two countries may be grouped under six heads: trade relations; the Boxer Re- bellion and the Open Door; Chinese labor and restrictions upon Chinese immigration ; China in the past, particularly during the 1 Timothy T. Lew, "China in American School Text-Books," Special Supplement to Chinese Social and Political Science Review, VI-VII (July, 1923). 80 COUNTRIES OF THE FAR EAST 81 period of discovery; consideration of China at the Washington Arms Conference; and the Six-Power Loan. No textbook, in those mentioned as illustrating the customary discussions, touches upon all the points enumerated. All treat the Boxer Rebellion and the Open Door Policy. All but one mention Chinese immigra- tion and the attitude of the United States toward it.2 Only one in- troduces information regarding the Six-Power Loan.3 Four deal with trade relations between the two countries.4 Owing to economic conditions, the Chinese are pictured as- generally an undesirable element in the United States. This fact is explained as due to their influence in reducing wages and lowering the standard of living. "Accustomed to starvation wages and indifferent to the standards of living," says Beard, "they [the Chinese] threatened to cut the American standard to the point of subsistence."5 The first restrictive measures on Chinese entrance to this country are justified, therefore, on the ground of economic neces- sity. "Though the law seems harsh," declares Fite, "every nation undoubtedly possesses the right to expel from its shores any aliens whose presence may be considered dangerous to its interests, and likewise to refuse admission to all whom it may consider un- desirable."6 Evasion of restriction, moreover, is charged against the Chinese by Evans, who places the blame at the door of the 2 Hulbert, United States History. 3Muzzey, An American History. 4 Fite, History of the United States; Fish, History of America; Guitteau, History of the United States; Beard, History of the United States. The histories taken as typical and to illustrate this condition were: Beard, op. cit.; Bourne and Benton, American History; Fish, op. cit.; Fite, op. cit.; Forman, Advanced American History; Guitteau, op. cit.; Hulbert, op. cit.; Latane, History of the United States; McLaughlin, History of the American Nation; Muzzey, op. cit. 5 Beard, op. cit., p. 583. See, among others, Fite, op. cit., p. 458; Evans, The Essential Facts of American History, p. 428; Fite, The United States, pp. 453-54; Barnes, Short American History for Grades, p. 315; Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, p. 344; Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, p. 468; Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, p. 393. 6 Fite, History of the United States, p. 458. 82 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS "shrewd Oriental," who can land in Canada and "easily find his way across the border."7 The part of the United States in the Boxer Rebellion is held a bright page in our history. The returning to the Chinese of part of the indemnity money and, as a result, the action of the Chinese government in sending native students to America to study is hailed as a most effective means of promoting inter- national good will. The Open Door Policy is also described as springing from a spirit of generosity toward peoples weaker than ourselves.8 JAPAN The benefit of Perry's visit to Japan does not pass unnoticed in most of our histories. "And from that day," declares Barnes in his Short American History for Grades, "Japan, copying American ideas and methods, has advanced until it is now the foremost nation of Asia."9 "Under the friendly guidance of the United States, she started her remarkable modern career," says Home. "She rapidly developed her industries, and became the powerful country that she is today."1 The part of the United States in the Russo-Japanese War again shows this country in the role of benefactor to Japan. In a settlement characterized as "spectacular,"11 it was considered a victory for the United States in its effort to protect the smaller nation. 7 Evans, op. cit., p. 428. 8 See Fite, History of the United States, p. 531 ; Fite, The United States, p. 412; Mace, School History of the United States, p. 458; Beard, op. cit., pp. 501-2; Barnes, Short American History for Grades, p. 333; Stephenson, A School History of the United States, p. 416; Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, pp. 537-38; Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, pp. 352-53; Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States, p. 378; Leonard and Jacobs, op. cit., p. 490; Halleck, History of Our Country, p. 443; Gordy, History of the United States, pp. 437-38; Burnham, The Making of Our Country, p. 564; Forman, op. cit., pp. 529-30; Home, The Story of Our American People, II, 362-63. 9 Barnes, Short American History for Grades, p. 226. 10 Home, op. cit., II, 203. 11 Beard, op. cit., p. 512. COUNTRIES OF THE FAR EAST 83 As with China, immigration policies as they relate to the Japanese are condoned. "Were we to throw open our doors to unlimited Japanese immigration we should be inviting a far more serious race problem than we now have with the Negro and the Indian,"12 declares one writer. Nor is attention focused upon the relations existing between the two countries since the last im- migration law was enacted and discriminatory measures were directed toward Japan. "Elson, op. cit., p. 468. CHAPTER VIII RACIAL ELEMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES THE DUTCH Of those peoples with whom Americans have had contacts, not discussed elsewhere, the Dutch of Colonial times have received the least criticism. Their "usual fairness,"1 their industrious habits,2 and their enterprise in trading3 are characteristics which are given special emphasis. In view of the small part they have had in our history, it is not strange that they receive little attention as compared with France, England, and Germany. THE SCOTCH AND IRISH Among the early immigrants to America mentioned in the histories are the Scotch-Irish, described by Muzzey as "that sterling, hardy race of men which has given us some of the most distinguished names in our history."4 They were, says Forman, the best of pioneers, and they soon were out on the frontier, making settlements wherever they could find good vacant lands. They paid but little attention to the claims of the Indians, for they thought "it was against the laws of God and nature that so much good land should be idle while so many Christians wanted it to work and to raise their bread."6 The loyalty of the Scotch-Irish to the Colonial cause is a further instance of commendation of their virtues.6 As a land of refuge and of opportunity, according to histories which treat in any detail of 'the immigration problem, America 1 Home, The Story of Our American People, I, 243. - Muzzey, An American History, p. 59. 3 Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 66. 4 Muzzey, op. cit., p. 60. 5 Forman, Advanced American History, p. 86. See also Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States, pp. 67-68; Hart, School History of the United States, p. 248. 6 Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 103. 84 RACIAL ELEMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES 85 appealed to the Irish, who flocked to this country during the Potato Famine. The loyalty of this group later to the Union cause in the Civil War is not forgotten in enumerating the peo- ples who answered Lincoln's call.7 However, little space is devoted to these peoples in most his- tories. To get a full account of Irish activities, the reader must turn to the textbooks prepared for Catholic schools, such as McCarthy's History of the United States. The following in- cident, for example, is not discussed in any but Catholic histories : The wild summer of 1844 — It was in 1844 that Bishop Kenrick, of Philadelphia, asked the school board to allow Catholic children to use the Catholic version of the Bible. Many were} induced to be- lieve that Catholics wished to prevent Protestant pupils from read- ing their own Bible. In American Protestant opinion, during this period of anti-Catholic feeling, any Catholic was sufficiently bad, but the Irish were odious. In a Native American meeting violent language was used against the members of that persecuted race. At night their houses were stoned and burned. A few attempted to defend their homes and thus some members of the mob were slain. Then was raised the cry, 'To the nunnery!" At once a rush was made for a little community of Sisters of Charity, but a volley from its de- fenders drove the fanatics away for the moment. On the next day, after the burning of twenty-nine dwellings of Irish Catholics, a church and parochial residence were set on fire. The firemen declined to serve, and the militia were mute. At another place the mayor, who came out to plead for order, was brutally silenced by a missile, which knocked him senseless. The police were dispersed. Amid the shouts of a frenzied mob St. Augustine's Church also was devoted to the flames. When its blazing cross fell, there went up a mighty roar. The house of the Sisters did not escape a second time. The heroines of the cholera scourge were bereft of home. In this emergency Bishop Kenrick was compelled to suspend the exercises of public worship in the remaining Catholic churches. A grand jury called to inquire into the riots falsely ascribed them to "the efforts of a portion of the community to exclude the Bible from public schools." Those guilty of theft, arson, and murder were mentioned as "unoffending citizens." Though some ministers fanned 7 Forman, op. cit., p. 378. 86 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS the flames of hate, the more respectable Protestants of Philadelphia were ashamed of the atrocities.8 Another example of anti-Irish sentiment is narrated by the Franciscan Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration in their textbook : From the beginning of the establishment of Catholicity in America, there existed a party called Nativists, which, under the pretext of de- fending American institutions, carried on a warfare, sometimes open and sometimes secret, against the Catholic Church. Although there had been no open sign of hostility against the Catholic Church for nearly a generation, unhappily, as time went on, its growth was regarded by the Nativists with disfavor. Vile books, sermons and lectures against the Catholic religion gradually gave rise to such excitement that a mob (August 11, 1834) attacked the Ursuline Convent at Charles- town, near Boston, drove out the defenseless nuns and children, and burned their home to the ground. St. Mary's Church in New York was also plundered and given to the flames. The government made no attempt to prevent these outrages and the leaders were subjected to only a farcical trial, which resulted in their acquittal.9 THE PROBLEM OF IMMIGRATION The problem of immigration is presented from various points of view in our histories. Restriction, on the whole, is not con- demned, and in many cases it is strongly indorsed. Immigrants from Northern Europe, or those coming before 1880, are usually described as desirable. In some instances, the immigrant of re- cent years is said to be undesirable. Various motives are attributed to foreigners seeking homes in the New World, including the spiritual blessings of a free country and the economic advantages of free land,10 all of which are said to have been given freely to aliens, for "American democrats 8 McCarthy, History of the United States for Catholic Schools, pp. 315-16. 9 Franciscan Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration, A History of the United States for Catholic Schools, p. 342. 10Gordy, History of the United States, p. 306. See also Fite, The United States, p. 455; Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, pp. 266-67; West and West, The Story of Our Country, p. 356; Atkinson, European Beginnings of American History, p. 3; Thompson, First Book in United States History, p. 293; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, pp. 230-31. RACIAL ELEMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES 87 wanted to share their good fortune with the poor and oppressed in all parts of the world."11 On the other hand, some historians mention the contributions to American culture made by immigrants, particularly of North- ern Europe. Referring to aliens, especially those from Germany who came to the United States before 1850, The Story of Our Country acknowledges their introduction of new customs and ideas to American social and intellectual life. "They brought with them a deep love of music," it is said, "and had ideas for the development of schools and universities which were in advance of ours at that time."12 Material contributions "too large to estimate"13 are likewise attributed to them, their industrious habits and qualities of good citizenship making of them desirable elements in the up-building of their adopted country. Indeed, it is pointed out by one author: These different kinds of people all had something to bring with them French and Swiss immigrants were skilled in vine grow- ing; Irishmen know how to raise cattle; Germans were fond of music; the Swiss were builders of good roads. Most of the immigrants found work or made work, and the great West could not have been built up so quickly without the aid of the foreign-born laborers and their children.14 On the other hand, as pointed out in the discussion relating to the Chinese, the newer immigration does not receive much fa- vorable comment. Immigrants that come from the northern countries of Europe are of a class that make good citizens, and as long as most of the im- migrants were of that class all went well [says Thompson]. But since the War of Secession most of the immigrants coming to this country have been from the lower classes of eastern and southeastern Europe, and they give much trouble. They are for the most part very ignorant, and having been downtrodden in their old homes, they have no respect 11 Stephenson, A School History of the United States, p. 315. "West, The Story of Our Country, p. 357. 13Gordy, op. cit., pp. 386-87. See also Thwaites and Kendall, A History of the United States, p. 434. 14 Hart, op. cit., p. 390. 88 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS for law or government. In fact, many of them would like to see the government of the United States destroyed. How to deal with this undesirable class of immigrants is one of the most serious problems that we have today.15 Thus the problem of assimilating a diverse, "worthless and dangerous" people16 and making of them "good Americans" is presented to the pupil as one of no mean proportions. In in- stilling in them a love of the new homeland and "an adequate knowledge of American institutions and American government," teaching the English language is held essential.17 Lack of such training, we are told, is frequently responsible for political cor- ruption and other vices charged against our recent newcomers.18 Although some writers commend the new immigration for "count- less and invaluable" aid in American industrial growth,19 restric- tive measures as to entrance are generally indorsed.20 In brief, as Fite puts it, It is the duty of all who have come to America and are enjoying its privileges, to take out naturalization papers and become citizens. [For] this is their country, in which they do their work and bring up their families, and in which they expect to live and die. It is theirs for the opportunities it offers and the protection it affords, and it is theirs too in the obligation it places upon them to bear a share of its burdens. For old and new citizens to work together for the country's good, and to conserve the best that native and foreign born alike contribute to the national character, this is the true Ameri- canism.21 15 Thompson, First Book in United States History, p. 294. See also Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, pp. 455-56. 16 Burnham, The Making of Our Country, pp. 544-49. See also Barnes, Short American History for Grades, p. 380; Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, p. 432; Gordy, op. cit., p. 537. "Woodburn and Moran, Elementary American History and Government, pp. 513-14. 18 See, for example, on this point Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., pp. 389-90. 18 Beard and Bagley, History of the American People, pp. 502-5. See also Fite, op. cit., p. 453. 20 Mace, School History of the United States, p. 494; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 514. 21 Fite, op. cit., p. 456. RACIAL ELEMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES 89 THE NEGRO The place of the negro in American life is not ignored by the writers of history textbooks, but more attention is paid to the negro as a slave than as a citizen of the present. Although the brighter side of plantation life is depicted by some authors, nevertheless the sympathy of the reader is aroused for a people held in a bondage characterized as a "barbarous system," of which there were "odious aspects."22 The reader's compassion is quickened by the first narratives concerning slavery and its origin.23 In its later stages slavery is painted no less realistical- ly, particularly by northern historians. According to Burnham, Slavery was almost as great a curse to the white people of the South as it was to the negroes. It made the masters hard, passionate, and overbearing. White children who grew up with negro play- mates learned much that was evil from them. Ignorant, unskilled, and unwilling slave labor retarded the industrial development of the slaveholding states, in which they were very backward when compared with the free states.24 A different impression might be gained were the pupil to read only some "southern" histories in which the condition of slaves is described as generally not hard upon a people most of whom were "content to remain as they had been born."25 Yet the greater number of histories picture the institution of slavery as a "growing evil,"26 economically a poor system,27 and one in which the evils were greater than the benefits.28 In the consideration of the present-day negro problem, history textbooks do not have so much to say. In those books in which it is treated, far less space is devoted to it than to the negro problem before 1860. This is, of course, as one would expect. 22 McLaughlin, History of the American Nation, p. 348. 23 See, for example, Hart, New American History, p. 115; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 247; West and West, op. cit., p. 325. 24 Burnham, op. cit., p. 344. 25 Evans, The Essential Facts of American History, pp. 349-50. See also Hall, Smither, and Ousley, A History of the United States, p. 267. 28 Gordy, op. cit., p. 278. 2T McLaughlin, op. cit., pp. 273-75. 28 Burnham, op. cit., p. 548. 90 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS But the negro is usually accorded praise for his economic prog- ress from "abject poverty and the mental weakness of slavery" toward industrial independence.29 His great advance in education is pointed out by several authors, including books designed pri- marily for southern schools. Evans, in The Essential Facts of American History, for instance, makes clear that "they [negroes] have shown an exceeding eagerness for education, and are willing to endure hardships for the advantage to be derived from attend- ing schools As a race they have become hard-working and orderly citizens."30 In the forward movement of negro education, Booker T. Wash- ington is given high praise by several authors.31 However, the greater number of textbook writers pass by unnoted, not only his services to his race, but negro education and progress in general.32 Although mentioning the services of Booker T. Washington to his people, West and West, in The Story of Our Country, preface their remarks of commendation as to the progress of the negro with the statement that "the problem of the negro in the United States — his education, his rights, his relations to white men — is still unsolved."3 These authors also assert that leaders of both races have concluded that the white and black are better apart at present.34 As McLaughlin and Van Tyne put it : "It is coming more and more to be believed that white and black must be kept severed socially, and that the dominant race must see to it that the negro be given a helping hand toward educating him and making him useful in industry."35 29 Long, America, pp. 398-99. 30 Evans, op. cit., p. 420. See also Beard, History of the United States, pp. 397-98; Hart, School History of the United States, pp. 410-11; Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, p. 448; Gordy, op. cit., pp. 379-80. 31 Bourne and Benton, op. cit., p. 566 ; Robbins, School History of the American People, pp. 456-67; Gordy, op. cit., p. 380. 32 Mace and Bogardus, op. cit.; Channing, op. cit.; Forman, op. cit.; Muzzey, op. cit.; Guitteau, History of the United States; Hulbert, United States History; Fite, History of the United States, are among the number. 83 West, op. cit., p. 405. "Ibid., p. 406. 35 McLaughlin and Van Tyne, A History of the United States for Schools, p. 442. RACIAL ELEMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES 91 These authors, Beard, and others indicate that a political and social inequality exists in the South between the two races. Beard, however, points out that, with the migration of negroes to the North, the problem was no longer local but national.36 As a part of the problem, some authors attribute to the negro a tendency to be the prey of political corruption,37 and still in large numbers to be "ignorant, lazy and thriftless."38 THE INDIAN Characterized as "wild," "uncivilized," "cruel and barbarous by nature,"39 the Indian of the day of our forefathers is often encompassed by "a lurid trail of fire and blood."4 Withal a "vigorous and hardy people, well built, tall and handsome" and possessed of a "bitter hatred of enemies," the red man is some- times, on the other hand, shown to be the victim of the greed of the white man to whom originally he was "generally friendly."4 Some authors strive for balance, indicating that the Indian some- times contributed materially to the welfare of the colonists and that both races frequently failed "to comprehend the other's point of view."42 There is the same difference of opinion relative to our later policy toward the Indians. Guitteau describes it as "unjust," pointing out that the white men "constantly encroached upon the lands reserved for the Indians," thereby necessitating the tribe to move farther west.43 "For years," declares Robbins, 38 Beard, op. cit., p. 398. 37 See, for example, Burnham, op. cit., p. 548. This was said especially directly following the Civil War. See Gordy, op. cit., pp. 369-70; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., pp. 336-37; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 389. 38 Burnham, op. cit., p. 549. See also, for adverse criticism, Home, op. cit., II, 298. 39Forman, op. cit., p. 58. 40 Burnham, op. cit., p. 47. 41 Hart, New American History, pp. 14-15. See also Muzzey, op. cit., p. 25; Hulbert, op. cit., pp. 9-12; Fish, History of America, p. 82. 42 James and Sanford, American History, p. 101. See also Rugg, The Social Science Pamphlets, I, No. 1, 107-8. The divergent points of view are reflected, for example, in Long, op. cit., and Hulbert, op. cit. The latter is sympathetic. 43 Guitteau, Our United States, p. 494. 92 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS "the policy of our government was to treat the Indian as if he were a child and a pauper."44 The opposite point of view may be represented by Long, who characterizes the reservation policy toward the Indian as "liberal" and "generous."45 Governmental policy since 1885 is universally indorsed. "Since that time," says Robbins, "there has been little serious trouble, and the Red Man is learning to take his place as a citizen, mak- ing his own living and paying his own taxes."46 Garner and Henson emphasize the fact that the new policy has tended to make the Indians good citizens.47 Even Long, whose general treatment is such that neither pity for the Indian nor admiration for his personal qualities will be kindled in the reader, concludes that already he is making use of his farms, ranches and mineral lands. His young men proved gallant soldiers, brave and loyal, when they followed our flag overseas in the Great War, 1917-1918. The Ameri- can people are now resolved that the Indian shall be treated not as a charity patient, a "ward of the nation/' but as a man having equal right with other Americans to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."48 44 Robbins, op. cit., p. 412. 43 Long, op. cit., p. 410. See also Guitteau, Our United States, pp. 494-95. 48 Robbins, op. cit., p. 412. See also Gordy, op. cit., pp. 390-91. 47 Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, pp. 488-89. See also Channing, op. cit., p. 642. 48 Long, op. cit., p. 411. CHAPTER IX THE DEPENDENCIES OF THE UNITED STATES Judging from the evidence accumulated in history textbooks, those countries are indeed fortunate, not only in material, but in spiritual matters who fall under the jurisdiction and protection of the United States. Cuba, "pest-ridden" and rescued from "chaos" in three years, was given law, order, and cleanliness by American officials. "To the amazement of the world," after this brief period, American "troops were withdrawn leaving Cubans to win their own place among the world's free people."1 Al- though the Platt Amendment somewhat limits Cuban freedom, Long confesses, yet it assures the Cubans a "security from re- bellion at home and from enemies abroad."2 Under the protection of the United States, "though disturbed at times by temporary upheavals," Cuba, Fite believes, "has had on the whole a happy history."3 Indeed, "every citizen of the United States ought to feel proud of our treatment of Cuba," declares Halleck. "In all history no country has acted more generously toward another."4 To no less degree are the Philippines said to be benefited by contacts with the United States since 1898. The surprising result of the war [says Long] was that the Philip- pine islands came without forethought or welcome into America's pos- session The amazing feature of this expansion [of territorial 1 Long, America, p. 460. See also Muzzey, An American History, p. 461; Thwaites and Kendall, A History of the United States, p. 471; Hart, School History of the United States, p. 450; Gordy, History of the United States, p. 435; Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, p. 535; Robbins, School History of the American People, pp. 468-69; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, pp. 450-51. 2 Ibid. 3 Fite, The United States, p. 400. 4 Halleck, History of Our Country, p. 441. See also for Cuban-American relations, Hall, Smither, and Ousley, A History of the United States, pp. 438-39; Fish, History of America, pp. 476-77; Hulbert, United States History, p. 488; Beard, History of the United States, pp. 518-19. 93 94 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS possessions of the United States] is that no statesman planned it, that no party desired it. When we fought to make Cuba free we had no thought of distant lands or empire, and lo! islands and empire were forced upon us.5 To these new possessions, according to Long, the United States went "as a liberating rather than as a conquering nation." "The Philippines," he assures his readers, "are ours not to ex- ploit but to develop, to civilize, to educate, to train in the science of self-government." It was difficult, this author continues, for the Filipinos to believe our sincerity and to comprehend fully our statement that we came "as a liberating nation," for other na- tions "had ruled Eastern lands but left natives much as they found them."6 "After order was restored, our Government established among them schools and libraries," declare Thwaites and Kendall. Be- sides these spiritual contributions, the Americans have developed industries, improved sanitary conditions, and improved conditions in general. Indeed, according to Long, "It would take a volume to tell the story of American work in the Philippines, the sacrifice, the enthusiasm, the success of it."7 The granting of self-government to these people is mentioned frequently, but most authors point out that "it is not generally believed that the time has yet come for the United States to grant independence "8 According to Home, "Our pledge to free them still stands ; but the time when they are to be trusted to self-government does not seem to have arrived."9 That "there is a strong feeling in the United States that the Philippines ought 5 Long op. cit., pp. 460-62. 6 Ibid., pp. 466-68. ''Ibid., pp. 468-72. For improvements in conditions on these islands see, for example, Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 474; Robbins, op. cit., pp. 470-71; McLaughlin, History of the American Nation, p. 521; Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 536; Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, pp. 487-88; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 465; Gordy, op. cit., p. 431; Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States, p. 379. 8Fite, op. cit., p. 401. Also Forman, Advanced American History, pp. 527-28. "Home, The Story of Our American People, II, 361. DEPENDENCIES OF THE UNITED STATES 95 to be given self-government as soon as there is a reasonable pros- pect of success" is the view of McLaughlin and Van Tyne.10 As to the accomplishment of this fact, Muzzey expresses a skep- ticism in declaring, The professed policy of our government ever since the Spanish War has been to give the Filipinos their independence "when they are fit for it"; but as yet we have been unwilling to part with so rich and populous a domain as the Philippine Islands or abandon so fine a strategic post in the Far East.11 Yet as governed by the United States the islands are said to have profited, for the policy of America is held to be "liberal" and generally productive of good.12 "Having done so much for the people of the Philippines, Congress in 1917 did more for the people of Porto Rico," says McMaster. "It not only gave to them the right to elect members of both houses of their legislature, but made them citizens of the United States."13 The financial help "generously" given the Porto Ricans soon after they came under the control of the United States is men- tioned by Gordy,14 and other writers include in the benefits de- rived from American control, not only material advantages such as good roads and the development of intensive production of sugar, but the "inspiring" progress made by education.15 The importance of the Hawaiian Islands from a military as well as a financial point of view receives major emphasis in the textbooks. The nearness to the Philippines, the desirability of 10 McLaughlin and Van Tyne, A History of the United States for Schools, p. 442. 11 Muzzey, op. cit., p. 460. 12 On this point Beard points out that, regardless of the "liberal" policy, independence is still desired by the natives. "McMaster, A School History of the United States, p. 491. 14 Gordy, op. cit., p. 433. 15 Fite, op. cit., pp. 400-401 ; Burnham, The Making of Our Country, p. 561. 96 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS ownership by the United States as opposed to the disadvantages of ownership by other powers, are not ignored in the discussions.16 According to Long, we owe our valuable possession [of Hawaii] to New England missionaries, who won the friendship of the natives (1820) and created such a strong American sentiment, that, when European powers attempted to seize the islands, the natives appealed to our government for pro- tection and promptly received it.17 The customary treatment of acquisition is illustrated by James and Sanford, who point out that the Revolution of 1893 in Hawaii was "incited by Americans," in which the queen was de- posed, followed by American recognition of the provisional gov- ernment.18 American control of the Panama Canal region is treated with little openness by writers of textbooks. Certainly it is not set forth that there is any question either as to the advisability or as to the right of the American attitude toward the Panama Revolution. This does not mean that the skirts of the United States government are deliberately cleared of any selfish interest in the revolution, but it means that such an interest is not, as a rule, expressed in the discussions. The unwillingness of Colom- bia to sell the canal strip, the annoyance of Roosevelt because of Colombia's refusal, the desire of the people of Panama for a canal, the Panama revolt, and the presence of the United States naval forces "to watch the course of events" are points brought out in some discussions.19 West and Home make so bold as to "Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 437; Beard, op. cit,, p. 482; Stephenson, A School History of the United States, pp. 413-14; Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 475; Channing, Elements of United States History, p. 336; Halleck, op. cit., pp. 441-42; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 449; Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, pp. 483-84; Woodburn and Moran, Elementary American History and Government, p. 419; Forman, op. cit., p. 510; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, op. cit., p. 413; Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, p. 480; Long, America, pp. 472-73. 17 Long, op. cit., p. 472. 18 James and Sanford, American History, p. 485. 18 Beard and Bagley, History of the American People, p. 601; Beard, op. cit., pp. 508-9; Estill, Beginner's History of the United States, p. 285; DEPENDENCIES OF THE UNITED STATES 97 say that Americans "encouraged a revolt in Panama," the latter suggesting that as a result of this incident "many South Ameri- cans thus came to distrust us."2[) According to West, "American naval forces were so disposed as to assist the revolution materi- ally; and ex-President Roosevelt has acknowledged that the re- volt was directly manipulated from Washington. (Said he frankly some years later, 'I took Panama.')"21 According to Forman, "in hot-footed haste [Roosevelt] recognized the new government or- ganized by the seceding State."22 Such statements do not ap- pear often, however. The payment later of $25,000,000 to Colombia "to remove any ground for belief that a sister republic had been unjustly treated" might, if so stated, occasion in the reader a suspicion that some question as to the action of the United States had arisen.23 Many textbooks fail to mention the appearance of American naval forces in Colombian waters during the revolu- tion.24 The reluctance of Colombia to release the canal strip to the United States is generally regarded as due to selfish motives and a desire to get all she could.25 The value of the canal from a financial point of view is given much attention.26 Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 426; Fite, History of the United States, p. 519, illustrate typical treatment. 20 Home, op. cit., II, 467. "West, History of the American People, p. 644. -2 Forman, op. cit., p. 541. 23 Robbins, op. cit., p. 481. -4 For example, the following do not mention American naval forces : Eggleston, First Book in American History; Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit.; McMaster, op. cit.; Stephenson, op. cit.; Hart, op. cit.; Mace, School History of the United States; Thompson, First Book in United States History; Gordy, op. cit. 25 McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 525 ; Elson, op. cit., p. 494. 28 Thompson, History of the People of the United States, pp. 452, 454; Eggleston, op. cit., p. 194; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 470; Burnham, op. cit., pp. 566-69; Estill, op. cit., pp. 284-85; Barnes, Short American History for Grades, p. 336; Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, pp. 354-55; Leonard and Jacobs, pp. cit., p. 482; Mace, op. cit., p. 462; Thompson, First Book in American History, p. 366; Halleck, op. cit., pp. 489-90; Gordy, op. cit., pp. 441-42. 98 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS The expansion of the United States through the establishment of protectorates is not accorded much consideration in the com- monly used histories. The setting-up of protectorates over Santo Domingo, Nicaragua, and Haiti is explained on the basis that such action prevented "a hostile European power" from becom- ing "a source of danger to American interests."27 In the case of Santo Domingo, the influence of the United States is ascribed to the effectiveness of the Monroe Doctrine that caused the world to open its eyes. "The practical effect was to make Uncle Sam a kind of policeman for the western hemisphere."28 The necessity of a supervision of the affairs of Nicaragua is ascribed to the danger which might be occasioned were a foreign power to seize territory near our canal, or, perhaps, dig another canal through Nicaragua.29 Thus, according to Hall, Smither, and Ousley: By various steps, either in the enforcement of the Monroe Doc- trine or to protect our own interests by guarding the approaches to the Panama Canal, we have adopted a kind of supervision over many of the islands of the Caribbean Sea and the mainlands bordering on its waters. Santo Domingo, Haiti, Venezuela, and Nicaragua were all heavily in debt to European powers. Upon the appeal of these countries, or in order to prevent foreign intervention and occupation which would be a violation of the Monroe Doctrine, the United States has assumed a certain degree of authority in the management of their finances for the payment of their debts. We have gained control of all available canal routes and have been granted coaling stations and naval bases.30 "In line with this policy of guarding American interests in the Caribbean was the purchase of the Danish islands," assert 27 Beard and Bagley, op. cit., p. 611. The quotation refers to Haiti in particular. See also Long, op. cit., p. 445; Beard, op. cit., p. 513; Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 606; Gordy, op. cit., pp. 436-37; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 470; Elson, op. cit., p. 517; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 515; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 413. -8Forman, op. cit., p. 543. 29 Long, op. cit., pp. 479-80. 30 Hall, Smither, and Ousley, A History of the United States, pp. 460-61. DEPENDENCIES OF THE UNITED STATES 99 Beard and Bagley.31 The strategic advantages of an ownership of the Virgin Islands is likewise discussed by other authors.32 Such intervention in the affairs of neighboring peoples has been adjudged a good thing, for wherever national duty imposes on them tasks of colonial administra- tion be it in the Orient or in the Occident, Americans at once gather the youth of the land which is placed in their charge, into public schools like those of the United States. The public school is a store- house of national well-being for all peoples.33 The policy is clearly depicted as a means for national de- fense. "Since we have become a world power we must play the game of world politics," declares Long. "For us the first ob- ject of that dangerous game is not to get more territory but to guard our national peace and safety."3 The influence of eco- nomic forces as a factor in the American adventure into the Caribbean is not set forth for the pupil. The Story of Our Coun- try is unique in stating that our military officers have sometimes used their authority in "very arbitrary and un-American ways."3 81 Beard and Bagley, op. cit., p. 613. K Beard, op. cit., pp. 479-80, 593-94; Barnes, Short American History for Grades, p. 382; Fite, The United States, p. 410; Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, p. 606; Mace, op. cit., pp. 474-75; Halleck, op. cit., p. 491; McMaster, op. cit., p. 491; Woodburn and Moran, Elementary American History, p. 437; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 471; Bourne and Benton, op. cit., p. 485; Robbins, op. cit., p. 482; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 482. 33 Fite, The United States, p. 409. 34 Long, op. cit., p. 480. 35 West, The Story of Our Country, p. 471. CHAPTER X THE FOREIGN POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES Although introduced at other points in this study, it may be well to add a few statements concerning discussions relating to the foreign policy of the United States — a policy inaugurated by Washington and receiving universal commendation. All au- thors are agreed that Washington's policy was the only feasible and sensible procedure open to the United States at that time.1 Its significance in establishing an isolation for the United States and in keeping this country out of "European quarrels" is men- tioned.2 Such, indeed, is held highly desirable according to the textbooks. The same favorable treatment as given Washington's policies is accorded the Monroe Doctrine. Far more space in the histories is devoted to its pronouncement and its earlier applications than to the significance of its later growth and applications, which are inadequately and superficially dealt with. It is generally conceded to have been a "necessary" as well as a beneficial doctrine not only for the United States but for those nations to whom it was to apply. Its main motive, according to McLaughlin, who quotes Schouler on this point, was "to shelter honorably those tender blossoms of liberty on kindred soil from the cold Siberian blasts 1 See, for example, West, The Story of Our Country, p. 234; Fish, History of America, p. 202; Evans, The Essential Facts of American History, pp. 242-43; Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 243; Hart, New American History, p. 223; Guitteau, Our United States, p. 245; Robbins, School History of the American People, p. 193; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, A History of the United States for Schools, p. 240; Mace, School History of the United States, p. 228. 2 See, for example, Mace, School History of the United States, p. 228; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, A History of the United States for Schools, p. 240. 100 FOREIGN POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES 101 of despotism."3 The United States is made, therefore, the "cham- pion of freedom throughout the two Americas."* The effect of its declaration upon the American people is held likewise profoundly beneficial, for it made men whose politi- cal horizon had been limited to a community or a state "con- sider their nation a great power among the sovereignties of the earth, taking its part in shaping their international relations."5 The approval of the Doctrine by the American people and its gradual incorporation into the consciousness of the United States served as bulwarks for a growing nationalism.6 That the Doc- trine was not unanimously indorsed by people of its time is men- tioned by Bourne and Benton.7 Europe also gave heed, for, according to Gordy, although "a vigorous position to take," the Americans had won respect through "the valor and heroism of our fighting on land and sea, and the brilliant victories already achieved."8 That Europe has not always liked the Doctrine but has not dared disregard it is called to the reader's attention by Thompson and Barnes.9 The "triumphs" of the Doctrine, whenever applied to inter- national disputes, are chronicled in connection with the portions of this study dealing with the different countries concerned. As a doctrine of peace and a preserver of democracy, it receives in the textbooks the approval of their authors.10 3 McLaughlin, History of the American Nation, pp. 273-74. * Robbins, School History of the American People, p. 212. 5 Beard, History of the United States, p. 207. °See Forman, Advanced American History, p. 260; Fish, op. cit., p. 215; Beard and Bagley, First Book in American History, p. 194. 7 Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 277. 8 Gordy, History of the United States, p. 235. 9 Thompson, First Book of United States History, pp. 255-56; Barnes, Short American History, pp. 178-79. 10 See Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, p. 288; Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States, p. 223, for examples of this point. CHAPTER XI POLITICAL CONCEPTS The American public school, through the agency of the text- book, is definitely committed to inculcating in the pupil's mind political concepts held to be mainly American. These include concepts transmitted to the present generation through a period of change, development, and adjustment, as well as the original theories respecting the rights and duties of man under govern- ment, as bequeathed by our American forbears. History text- book writers, very naturally, leave to the authors of books on government extensive discussions of these factors in American life. But historians do not fail to note their significance in the political history of the country. Among the "rights" inherited by the American people, accord- ing to the textbooks, are the right of petition, free speech and press, religious freedom, the right of holding property, freedom of person, and trial by jury. The obligation of the citizen to his government likewise re- ceives attention. Those political documents which have held and secured the rights and privileges of Americans, the character and structure of the government, and recent innovations, such as the recall, are not unnoticed. The rule of the people, in which there is a majority as opposed to minority opinion, most often ex- pressed through political parties, the delights of democracy pro- claimed because of the "consent of the governed," make of our government, in the words of a textbook writer, "the largest and most promising of mankind's experiments in this difficult field of self-government by an entire people."1 He declares : Our country has developed into a true Representative Democracy. That is, our people select their own officials, and have all an equal vote in changing them when necessary. These representatives are pledged to direct our Government for the equal benefit of us all. 1 Home, The Story of Our American People, I, 3. 102 POLITICAL CONCEPTS 103 There is the same law for all, the same permissions and the same re- straints. That is the nearest approach to the ideal of EQUALITY that man has yet been able to attain.2 That "democracy is considered the ideal form of government by most of the civilized world" is made an accepted truth.3 The reasonableness and effectiveness of the representative system are stressed as well.* Through such a system, liberty, the boon offered by America to all, according to the writers, was pre- served. As a tool in its preservation is the law, written or un- written, toward which obedience is owed by all to whom it offers protection.5 As setting forth the principles of government, the most fre- quently discussed political documents are the Mayflower Com- pact, the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confedera- tion, the Constitution, and the state constitutions. The North- west Ordinance is also frequently treated. According to Hart, the great principles contained in the state constitutions, the Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation are: (1) A written constitution is a "fundamental law" which cannot be altered by an ordinary law of a legislature or congress (2) The old doctrine of "natural rights'* or "fundamental rights" or "inalienable rights" was claimed in the Declaration of Independ- ence, and enlarged and stated in the "bills of rights" which were added to the state constitutions (3) The Americans wanted a popular government in which there should be no king, no nobles, no privileged classes 6 The praise given these bulwarks of American freedom is not scant in any sense. The Declaration of Independence is said to 2 Ibid. 3Fite, History of the United States, p. 177. 4 See, for example, statements bearing out this point in McLaughlin, History of the American Nation, p. 134; Daffan, History of the United States, p. 49; Fish, History of America, p. 145. B Fish, op. cit., has developed this probably to the greatest degree of any of the high-school histories. 8 Hart, School History of the United States, pp. 151-52. 104 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS be "truly immortal,"7 "a great human document,"8 and "the most famous document known in the history of our country."9 The Constitution is adjudged "the most marvelous written political instrument that has ever been made."1' Evans describes it as a "noble instrument .... made by the greatest men of our na- tion."11 A monumental episode in the world's history, the American Con- stitution! [Long declares, quoting A. Maurice Low] Never was there anything like it The history of mankind is a struggle for liberty and equality. From the time that men began to teach and to preach they taught liberty and proclaimed equality ; but neither liberty nor equality existed as we today know them, until they were written into the American Constitution, there to remain and to be a beacon-light to all the world.12 The famous remark of Mr. Gladstone, that the United States Constitution was "the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man," likewise finds a place in the textbooks.13 Leonard and Jacobs, in The Nation's History, confess that "the Constitution of the United States may not be perfect ; but it is the best constitution which the wisest Americans of 1787 were able to make, and it has stood the test of time."1 7 Beard and Bagley, History of the American People, p. 150. 8 Fite, op. cit., p. 133. See also Woodburn and Moran, Elementary American History and Government, pp. 143-44. "White, Beginner's History of the United States, p. 137. See also Channing, Elements of United States History, p. 145; Hart, op. cit., pp. 148-49; Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, pp. 139 if.; Burnham, The Making of Our Country, pp. 135-36; Bourne and Benton, American History, pp. 119-21. 10 Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 220. See also Fish, op. cit., p. 178; Elson, op. cit., p. 206; Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States, p. 158; Fite, The United States, p. 185; McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 196. 11 Evans, The Essential Facts of American History, p. 234. 12 Long, America, p. 221. 13 Elson, op. cit., p. 195; Burnham, op. cit., p. 167. "Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, p. 215. POLITICAL CONCEPTS 105 Its perfection is further attested to by Home, when he points out: Many written constitutions have since been prepared by various nations; but they all had this one for a model. Our founders had no similar document to go by. They drew their ideas from the Declara- tion of Independence, from colonial charters, from the practical ex- perience of each colony in self-government, and from their own broad knowledge of mankind. The Constitution established the basic, un- changing principles of our American philosophy of government. It fitted the moment and the need, as no other government could have done. Yet in matters of detail it contained such wise provisions for its own change that we have ever since been able to alter it to fit new conditions and new generations of men.15 Duty to a constituency and the necessity of honesty in office are qualities mentioned as desirable for public officials. "But where dishonesty by a man in public office has been proved he may be regarded as little better than a traitor," declares Rob- bins.16 Discussions of corruption in Grant's administrations fre- quently emphasize the dangers of such a condition, and the in- fluence of public opinion in getting upright officials is a point made occasionally in connection with the duties of a voter.17 Advocacy of civil service reform and disapproval of the spoils system have their place in the textbooks.18 Throughout, however, the space allotment is far less than in books designed primarily for the student of government. 15 Home, op. cit., I, 428-29. 18 Robbins, School History of the American People, p. 539. 17 McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 521. 18 See, for example, Evans, op. cit., pp. 424-25; Robbins, op. cit., pp. 252, 424-25; Fite, History of the United States, pp. 278-79; McLaughlin, op. cit., pp. 292-93; Beard, History of the United States, pp. 538-39; Beard and Bagley, First Book in American History, p. 205; Barnes, Short American History by Grades, p. 194; Fite, The United States, p. 262; Garner and Henson, Our Country's History, pp. 495-96; Thwaites and Kendall, A History of the United States, pp. 437-38; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 227; Leonard and Jacobs, op. cit., pp. 408, 279; Halleck, History of Our Country, p. 315; Gordy, History of the United States, p. 250. CHAPTER XII THE AMERICAN: HIS ACHIEVEMENTS, IDEALS, AND COUNTRY Closely allied with the political concepts gained from reading history textbooks are attitudes and ideals, some of which are political, set up regarding the character and prowess of the United States. Here by direction and indirection the writers of textbooks have created impressions regarding American customs, institutions, and ideals which tend to separate the United States from other nations. The boon of freedom, denied to many peo- ples, the wonders of democracy and the democratic principles of the American people as presented to pupils inevitably must make a lasting impression. Through all runs the story of the superiority of a people able to create and to attain the unusual. Our country [says Long] began at a time when kings misruled the world, when government was considered such a difficult science that only a few trained nobles could understand it Yet our colonists quickly mastered the practical art of government; .... in the field of politics the American people have done three extraordinary things : 1. They have constantly aimed to govern themselves instead of tamely submitting to be governed by others, as most of the world's people have submitted up to recent times. 2. They changed the nature of government, as men formerly un- derstood it 3. Following their own theory of government the American people have been steadily removing every form of class privilege; that is, a right given to one class of people which is not equally given to every other class America stands for one folk equal before God and man in their rights and privileges. That is the pride of our democracy, and the wisdom and power of it.1 All this, according to authors, created in other nations won- derment and surprise, for the unique character of the form of government established by the Revolutionary patriots and since JLong, America, pp. 9-10. 106 THE AMERICAN 107 maintained by "a plain people" aroused an interest in "thought- ful men and women the world over, especially in monarchical Europe, where the common people had little power "2 For: .... Ours is a government not of force or fear but of ideals. .... Liberty is an American ideal, and every man desires liberty above all other gifts. Justice is an American ideal, and every right- minded man believes in justice. Equality (meaning equal rights) is an ideal in which men have always believed, yet the human quality of all citizens was never admitted by any nation -until it was written into the Constitution of the United States 3 More than this, the social ideals of the American people have occasioned astonishment in people. They cannot understand how "in all our free America of today, we do not consider one person better than another on account of birth and station."4 Indeed, it is taught that America is "the greatest democratic nation in the world," the " 'land of the free and the home of the brave.' "5 The Revolution, according to Bourne and Benton, made a nation "dedicated to the ideals of equal opportunity, of inalien- able rights, and of government by the consent of the governed. .... It meant, moreover, the presence among the nations of one that knew no caste, no nobility, or other hereditary dis- tinctions "6 For, according to Home, "there is the same law for all, the same permissions and the same restraints."7 And Fite quotes Crevecour's definition : Here individuals of all races are melted into a new race of men, whose labors and posterity will one day cause great changes in the world. Americans are the western pilgrims, who are carrying along with them the great mass of arts, sciences, vigor and industry, which began long since in the east. They will finish the great circle Here they are incorporated into one of the finest systems of popu- 2 Fite, History of the United States, p. 295. 3 Long, op. cit., pp. 6-7. 4Elson, United States: Its Past and Present, p. 95. 5 Burnham, Our Beginnings in Europe and in America, pp. 363, 5-6. 6 Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 160. 7 Home, The Story of Our American People, I, 3. 108 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS lation which has ever appeared The American is a new man, who acts upon new principles; he must therefore entertain new ideas, and form new opinions This is an American."8 Thus, out of these unusual conditions has come a people who seek "the way of justice," and who follow it "when they have found it" ;9 who have the qualities of "good humor, a love of free- dom, cheerfulness in bad fortune, generosity in good fortune, warm-heartedness, shrewdness, carelessness of danger, and im- mense energy,"1' and who are "wide-awake, industrious, and thoughtful men, women and children."1 It is American ingenuity that has placed our country among the first industrial nations of the world, according to Beard and Bagley.12 Evidence of this quality is adduced by "the dynamic energy" and "amazing activity" of the Americans upon the en- trance of the United States into the World War.13 In the arts and sciences, the textbooks describe the American people as having shown a "more wonderful genius for invention than those of any other country."1 Indeed, according to one textbook, "The American invents as the Greek chiseled, as the Venetian painted, as the modern Italian sings."15 "Americans are celebrated for their skill in adapting scientific knowledge to useful ends," says Stephenson.16 In the field of literary endeavor, American newspapers and magazines are "among the best," and many of our authors, artists, and musi- 8 Fite, The United States, p. 115. 0 Long, op. cit., p. 429. 10 Stephenson, A School History of the United States, p. 518. 11 Hart, School History of the United States, p. 12. See also Long, America, p. 12. 12 Beard and Bagley, First Book in American History, p. 354. "Elson, op. cit., pp. 523-24. 14 Thompson, First Book in United States History, p. 346. See also Hart, op. cit., p. 460; Evans, The Essential Facts of American History, pp. 449-85. "West, The Story of Our Country, p. 281. 18 Stephenson, op. cit., p. 501. See also Thompson, History of the United States, Political, Social, Industrial, p. 151. THE AMERICAN 109 cians are believed to have attained world-wide renown.17 Thwaites and Kendall declare: The religion, literature, and pleasures of the people show what they really are. The United States was simple and clean in its amuse- ments and had ideals that it was not ashamed to show. President Roosevelt's demand for a "square deal" for everyone expressed the desire of a nation that loved clean sport and hated a cheat. The great churches that were being built, from the massive cathedrals in New York, to humble missions in little towns, measured an interest in things of the spirit that prosperity had not lessened Throughout the literature and religion ran unceasingly the old Ameri- can ideals of real democracy. Even the moving pictures, which be- came more popular than the theater had ever been, expressed these same notions of democracy 18 For the promotion of intellectual interests, it is agreed that "no country has a more complete system of public schools" than the United States,19 for it was early recognized that education was necessary for an intelligent and upright citizenry.20 According to Robbins, It is because democracy means "government of the people, by the people" that education has always been a matter of such grave con- cern to good citizens of our republic. Our people may be expected to rule their country the more wisely as they are the more educated.21 In providing for education, the United States, according to Hall, Smither, and Ousley, "is the foremost in the world."22 The "Hall, Smither, and Ousley, A History of the United States, p. 522; Fite, History of the United States, p. 298; West, op. cit., pp. 493-94. 18 Thwaites and Kendall, A History of the United States, pp. 486-87. 19 The statement of Stephenson, op. cit., p. 503. 20 Home, op. cit., II, 485; I, 218. See also Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 423. 21 Robbins, School History of the American People, p. 530. See also Woodburn and Moran, Elementary American History and Government, p. 502; Gordy, History of the United States, p. 539. 22 Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., p. 514. See also for American education, Eggleston, First Book in American History, p. 97; Vollentine, The Making of America, p. 245; Fite, The United States, p. 385; Garner 110 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS American people, it is held, have become obsessed with "a popu- lar passion" for education, which has made it possible for all to have an education. This popular fancy for education is ad- ditional proof that Americans are "concerned with matters of the spirit as well as with material things."23 In our relationship with other nations, the histories describe the United States as always willing to help the distressed and as being of service, in innumerable ways, to the whole world. "The United States, now the leading power of the world," de- clares Barnes, "has done more for world advancement than any other nation "24 Indeed, it is the natural instinct of Americans to help the distressed, or as one textbook puts it, act as "Good Samaritans."25 As examples of this generous spirit, the writers of histories mention "how Americans saved the world from a scourge (yellow fever)";26 how Americans came to the aid of the Cubans for "humanity's sake" ;27 how we sent for re- lief to the starving people of Russia "twenty million dollars" in 1921 ;28 how we have maintained a generous attitude toward China;29 how, in the World War, we became the defender of humanity.30 In this last connection it is said that our unselfish- ness is well demonstrated in the amount of money spent when we were " 'seeking nothing for ourselves but what we shall wish to share with all free peoples.' "31 and Henson, Our Country's History, p. 570; West, The Story of Our Country, pp. 495 ff.; Rugg, Pamphlets, I, 167-68; 173-74; Mace and Bogardus, History of the United States, p. 424; Halleck, History of Our Country, p. 527. 23Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 423. 24 Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, pp. 425-26. 25 Halleck and Frantz, Our Nation's Heritage, p. 408. 26 Ibid., pp. 408-9. 27 See Home, op. cit., II, 350; Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, p. 475; Halleck and Frantz, op. cit., pp. 406-7; Muzzey, An American History, p. 452. 28Elson, op. cit., p. 540. 29 Halleck and Frantz, op. cit., pp. 407-8. 30 The point of view of substantially all histories. 31 Halleck and Frantz, op. cit., p. 408. THE AMERICAN 111 In the World War, moreover, our service to humanity is said to have gone beyond the giving of money, for we are described as "Crusaders of old," who went forth to secure for all mankind "the right of self-government."32 For all this, "we asked no con- trol over any part of Europe's future, no security even for the payment of our debts. We left behind us only the graves of our men, who had died there that the world might be free."33 In all our generosity, according to Halleck and Frantz, we do not consider the "almighty dollar."34 We have far less "narrow- ness" than other nations, another writer tells us, and "give fair play even to the weakest."35 Thus, the United States has come to be thought "a kind of paradise, a land of hope" by "the poor folk and oppressed of other lands," for it is known "as the land where work brings its best reward, the one region where Peace seems assured, the land of Opportunity." Indeed, "the leaders of other countries," as well as the poor and oppressed, are said to "turn to the United States. They know it as a land of Power, able to help them in their political troubles, yet not grasping at their rights. They seek our young strength and energy to aid in solving the world-made problems of government at home and trade abroad."36 In other ways than in protecting and aiding the weak and defenseless, the United States is believed to have been "of service to the Old World." Washington, Franklin, and Lincoln have influenced the history of all peoples ; we have "performed a great service for humankind by inviting immigrants to come to our shores as long as there was plenty of good land" ; the American "contribution to free government" is inestimable for we have been a powerful advocate of democratic ideals the world over.37 Then in the merely material, we have become "the granary of the world," a country to which "men come .... from all lands when they desire to borrow money." In other words, "we have 32 Guitteau, Our United States, pp. 632-33. 33 Home, op. cit., II, 444. 34 Halleck and Frantz, op. cit., p. 406. 35 Home, op. cit., II, 288; I, 2. M Ibid., p. 1. "Halleck and Frantz, op. cit., pp. 408-13, 398-406; Gordy, op. cit., p. 419. 112 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS advanced from our former isolation to a position of leadership in the world," in which "we have a great part to play."38 In American industrial life, there has been an astonishing development, according to the textbooks. "America has become one of the first workshops of the world," says Beard, in com- menting upon the closely knit character of our business organiza- tion.39 The United States is said also to be "the chief exporting nation of great staples like foodstuffs and steel," whereas New York has become "the money, banking, and credit center of the world."43 From fourth in the production of manufactured goods in 1860, the United States advanced during the thirty years fol- lowing to first place, and now holds the rank of "the leading manufacturing nation of the world."41 Such conditions have brought about "prosperity" to a degree unknown to other nations.42 America has become "the richest country in the world."43 Aiding the ingenuity, inventive skill, and energy said to be characteristics of the American, have been the natural resources of the country44 embraced in a territory larger than Western and Central Europe.45 In about "sixty years" this vast area 38 Burnham, The Making of Our Country, pp. 597-98. See also Stephenson, op. cit., pp. 382, 480; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 530; Evans, op. cit., p. 530. 39 Beard, History of the United States, p. 475. See also for attitude toward capitalist class, Stephenson, op. cit., p. 501. ^Rugg, Pamphlets, II, 193. See also Guitteau, op. cit., pp. 554 if.; Eggleston, First Book in American History, p. 197; Vollentine, op. cit., pp. 235-55. "Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 471. 42 Barnes, op. cit., p. 268. See also among others, Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 420, 464, 518; Fish, History of America, p. 24. 43 Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 360. See also Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 503; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., pp. 468-70, 525. 44 Muzzey, op. cit., p. 22; Hart, New American History, p. 8; Forman, Advanced American History, pp. 60-61; Gordy, op. cit., p. 550. 45 Rugg, op. cit., I, 11; Stephenson, op. cit., pp. 483-84; Halleck, op. cit., p. 528; Elson, op. cit., pp. 178-79. THE AMERICAN 113 was transformed into "the richest industrial nation of the world."46 Such conditions in a country naturally lured to our shores many peoples. For is this not the "land of opportunity?"47 Burnham declares: Nearly all the people who have come from Europe to America, from its earliest history to the present time, came because they wanted to be free, or because they wanted a better chance to make a living than the Old World could give them. Some of them fled from the tyranny of wicked kings; others came to win the right to worship God in their own way; while many were driven out by the want and poverty in the overcrowded lands of their old homes. America has been the land of liberty and opportunity to one and all from the earliest to the latest comer.48 All this opportunity, according to Home, in The Story of Our American; People, seems to have been reserved for a chosen people by Divine Providence. The fact that our continent lay so long unused has seemed to many earnest thinkers one of the world's most striking manifestations of the Divine Purpose of God. They have believed that all this wealth of field and forest and mines was held untouched until civili- zation should grow worthy of it. America was to be a new rich heri- tage for man, not to be revealed to him until he had learned how to conserve it, how to govern both it and himself.49 Thus there came to inhabit the "promised land,"50 due to "a Divine Purpose working out some mighty aim for America," 46 Rugg, op. cit., II, 213, 290-91. Further references to the "prosperity" of the United States might be added, including Hart, School History of the United States, pp. 459-60; Beard, op. cit., p. 477; Halleck, op. cit., p. 368; Elson, op. cit., p. 525; Guitteau, op. cit., pp. 642-44; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 385. 47 Fish, op. cit., pp. 12, 26. See also McLaughlin, History of the American Nation, p. 293; West, The Story of Our Country, pp. 422, 62; Long, op. cit., p. 523. 4S Burnham, Our Beginnings in Europe and America, pp. 4-5. 40 Home, op. cit., I, 6. 50Daffan, History of the United States, p. 1. 114 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS "some of its [Europe's] richest seed," destined to be the ances- tors of "a new race, the 'Americans.' ' This chosen group some- times contained folk convicted as criminals; but laws have not always judged men as God judges them, and the governments of those days were apt to be harsh and narrow Men dwelt in ignorant terror of the law. .... Some of the convicts sent here were indeed evil-minded rascals ; but many were men we would have applauded for their so-called crimes. Moreover, even the real criminal, on being exiled here, had to develop a large strength of manhood — or he perished.51 For these unexcelled blessings, the pupil is urged to follow in the footsteps of his forbears, to offer unquestioning obedience to the law of the land, and to carry on the work begun. If the children of America grow up truthful and pure and brave, proud of their country, and loving God and theif fellow men, [de- clares Estill] if they have the wisdom of Benjamin Franklin, the patriotism of George Washington, the rugged honesty of Abraham Lincoln, the devotion to duty of Robert E. Lee, and Woodrow Wilson's love of freedom for all mankind — if they copy the virtues of their fathers and avoid their faults, the future of our country will be even greater and more glorious than the past.52 Our [United States'] future will be determined by the character of our citizens [says Gordy]. We can make the coming years more glorious than the past, if we hold to the ideals of those patriots who have built up our great republic. We owe it much. From the very beginning it has offered freedom of opportunity to all. In return, let us give loyalty and willing support to its great democratic principles and institutions. The national flag, our own "Stars and Stripes," is the supreme symbol of our republic and its wonderful achievement. Let us pledge allegiance to this flag, and let it inspire us with love for our country and with an abiding faith in its high destiny.53 The rendering of homage to the flag as the token of the unity of forty-eight states is held the means of quickening the patriotic pulse of the pupil. Therefore by law, it appears over the school- 51 Home, op. cit., pp. 7-11. 52 Estill, The Beginner's History of Our Country, p. 323. "Gordy, op. cit., p. 550. THE AMERICAN 115 houses of the land and its replica is found in the textbooks. Doubtless, for this purpose the American Legion is said to have sponsored a movement, in Kansas, placing in a million textbooks published in that state and used in the state's schools in 1926 the picture of the national emblem.54 Just what this love for country really means the textbook writers sometimes attempt to say. Patriotism or love of country [Halleck declares] begins first with an appreciation of the service rendered us in our own homes, and then extends to our neighborhood, state, and country Patriotism is more than saluting the flag. It is enlisting for life in active service for our country. We may challenge any one to name a country in the world that has done more for its citizens or given them a greater chance for success. The flocking of millions of immigrants to the United States bears witness to the greatness of its service, which it is our patriotic duty to repay. George Washington, however, never ex- cused himself from taking his part in the service of his country by asking: "What has my country done for me?" His question was: "What can I do for my country?" It is to such men that we owe our national existence and welfare.55 According to Horne, True patriotism consists in guiding our land, not in making empty boasts of its perfection. Patriotism is not a blind acceptance of every- thing about us, but a love for the Spirit which we believe our land to represent. For us that Spirit is shrined in democracy's motto: "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity." Liberty means command of the self within us; Equality means justice to others; and Fraternity means love for all. To aid in establishing and maintaining these, true patriotism per- forms its civic duties, even when these call for heavy sacrifice. It obeys our country's laws, even when annoyed by them; and it insists that others shall obey them also. It seeks to improve the future, while holding joyously at heart a deep-felt pride in the past, a love for every foot of our fair land.56 54 Daily lowan, August 21, 1926, Associated Press report. 55 Halleck, op. cit., pp. 531-32. 56 Horne, op. cit., II, 489. 116 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS Pupils reading West's Story of Our Country will find the authors' purpose in writing this history stated thus : America, your America! In a few years you will have a share in determining what this country shall be for the future. You should know then, what it has been and how it has come to be what it now is. You young Americans all like to salute the flag. That is well, even if you have no better reason than that it is your flag. But it is finer and better for you to love to salute it because you know with a joyous pride that it stands for freedom, for law, for fair opportu- nity in industry (and so for decent and happy homes), for goodwill to the peoples of other lands. To help you understand how this Amer- ica of ours has come to stand for these glorious principles is the purpose of this book.57 All this tends to develop in the pupil that sense of nationality which Long says is hard to define.58 In pointing out some of the characteristics of nationality, he tells his readers : American nationality means, among other things, that we have a country to honor, to serve, to live for at all times or to die for, as Nathan Hale died, if the stern call comes. It means that all our states are one, and our people one If the flag that floats over every public building should suddenly challenge the passing multitude "Who goes?" the instant response would not be a thousand different names but the single, myriad-tongued word "American." That answer, proud and loyal, voices the spirit of nationality. This unity of citizens outwardly different but inwardly alike is the result of history, of the welding together of a people who face problems, difficulties and dangers all together.59 The confession of this spirit of nationality is found in the American's Creed reproduced in some of the histories : I believe in the United States of America as a Government of the people, by the people, for the people; whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; a democracy in a republic; a sovereign nation of many sovereign states; a perfect union, one and inseparable; established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes. 57 West, The Story of Our Country, p. xxvi. "Long, op. cit., p. 273. ™ Ibid. THE AMERICAN 117 I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it; to sup- port its Constitution; to obey its laws; to respect its flag; and to defend it against all enemies.60 Depicted as worthy of imitation and as of unexcelled loyalty to country are many of the heroic characters common to the history textbooks. Most of these heroes have been engaged either in statecraft or in military exploits. It is safe to conclude that contributors to the acts of peace are not only given far less space in the textbooks than the groups mentioned, but often the language used concerning their achievements is spiritless and lacking in color. As an example of comparative space allotment, Gordy's Stories of Later American History may be cited. War heroes receive 3,227 lines, statesmen 1,160 lines, and those en- gaged in enterprises of peace, such as philanthropists, scientists, and inventors, 2,335 lines. Thus 4,387 out of a total of 6,722 lines are devoted to those whose interests were chiefly political and military.61 In enumerating the characters whose names appear most often in histories, one would naturally expect the name of Columbus, "the one man who had faith and courage enough to cross the Atlantic, and thus point the way to the New World."62 In the Colonial and Revolutionary periods, the reader finds the names of John Adams, "a true patriot and statesman";63 Samuel Adams, "a tribune of the people" whose own fortune dwindled in his espousal of the cause of the colonists,64 and who did more than anyone else to arouse the love of liberty in his colony.65 and Patrick Henry, whose "great gift" of oratory 60 Found in Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., frontispiece; Home, op. cit., II, 525. 61Gordy, Stories of Later American History (New York, 1923). 62 White, Beginner's History of the United States, p. 18. 6:i Elson, op. cit., p. 220. 84 Bourne and Benton, op. cit., p. 81. "Gordy, Stories of Later American History, pp. 15-29; Mace, Primary History of the United States, pp. 148-50, 151-52, 158; Forman, op. cit., pp. 110, 118; James and Sanford, American History, p. 150. These are typical treatments. 118 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS was "used in helping to secure the freedom we now enjoy."66 The greatest amount of attention of all, as the reader might expect, is devoted to Washington, "the beacon light" of the Revolution, the one hero and patriot who could not have been replaced.67 The contributions of his later life are in no less de- gree discussed in the highest and most laudatory language. All books read commend his services. Of other military heroes of this early period there is men- tion of the services of Ethan Allen,68 of Nathan Hale, whose only regret was that he had but one life to lose for his country,69 of Herkimer, "the hero of Oriskany,"70 of Nathaniel Greene, Morgan, Marion, Sumter, John Paul Jones, John Barry, Leger, Israel Putnam, John Stark, and Anthony Wayne.71 Of course the story of Paul Revere is not omitted, especially in the histories 66 Gordy, Stories of Later American History, pp. 1-13. See also Bourne and Benton, op. cit., p. 68; Latane, A History of the United States, pp. 99-100, 124; Hart, New American History, pp. 129, 152-53; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 110; Mace, op. cit., pp 142^7. 67 Hart, New American History, p. 145. See also Burnham, The Making of Our Country, pp. 153-54; Home, op. cit., II, 38; Elson, op. cit., pp. 137, 145, 208; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, pp. 164-65; Fish, op. cit., pp. 117, 161; Forman, op. cit., p. 186; Fite, The United States, p. 188; Halleck and Frantz, op. cit., pp. 389-92; Barnes, op. cit., pp. 225-26; Channing, Elements of United States History, pp. 151-52, 165-66, 148; West, The Story of Our Country, pp. 166-67; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 136; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 130; Gordy, History of the United States, p. 248; Gordy, Stories of Later American History, pp. 45-71; Beard and Bagley, History of the American People, pp. 163-65; Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, pp. 189-90; McLaughlin and Van Tyne, A History of the United States for Schools, pp. 158-59; Fite, History of the United States, p. 181; White, op. cit., pp. 176-77; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 183; McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 164; Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 231, and others. 68 Home, op. cit., I, 348. 69 Gordy, Stories of Later American History. See also Robbins, op. cit., pp. 133-34; Guitteau, op. cit., p. 174; Mace, op. cit., pp. 176-77. 70 Mace, op. cit., pp. 195-97; Home, op. cit., I, 348, 396. 71 Mace, op. cit., pp. 194 ff.; Beard and Bagley, First Book in American History, pp. 128 if.; Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 200; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., pp. 136 ff.; Channing, op. cit., pp. 155-56, 165, 191-92; Hart, School History of the United States, p. 137; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 154; Stephenson, op. cit., p. 190; Gordy, Stories of Later American History, pp. 78 ff.; Guitteau, op. cit., pp. 192-93; McLaughlin, THE AMERICAN 119 for elementary use, although it appears in some of the textbooks for the high school.72 Benedict Arnold and Charles Lee are held up to the pupils as examples of the basest and most dishonest of humankind.73 Their characters, as depicted, stand out in sharp contrast to the heroic figures commonly met. Of those other personages of these early days appearing fre- quently upon the pages of the histories are Captain John Smith, Roger Williams, William Penn, John Winthrop, Robert Morris, Benjamin Franklin, Hamilton, Otis, Dickinson, Madison, and Jefferson.74 In many cases groups of men engaged in a specific task or bound together by some common tie receive the praise often accorded individuals.75 op. cit., p. 170; McMaster, School History of the United States, pp. 148-4-9; Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., 186-87; Fite, History of the United States, pp. 146 if.; Forman, op. cit., p. 145; Gordy, History of the United States, pp. 142 ff.; Mace, School History of the United States, pp. 185-86; Tappan, American Hero Stories, pp. 151-58, 179 if. "Daffan, op. cit.; Tappan, op. cit., pp. 143-51; Hart, New American History, p. 135; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 103. See part of the study devoted to England. "Barnes, Short American History for Grades, p. 60; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 154; Elson, op. cit., pp. 164-65; Fite, History of the United States, p. 150; Hart, New American History, p. 147; Barnes, American History for Grammar Grades, p. 218; Fite, The United States, pp. 164^65. 74 Hart, New American History, p. 45; Eggleston, First Book in Amer- ican History, pp. 29, 130 ff.; Stephenson, op. cit., pp. 80-82; Muzzey, op. cit., pp. 43-44, 54; Forman, op. cit., pp. 223, 41, 54, 177; Bourne and Benton, History of the United States, pp. 163-64; Elson, op. cit., pp. 253-55, 271-72, 197, 268; Leonard and Jacobs, The Nation's History, pp. 166, 201-2; Beard, op. cit., pp. 145-46; Latane, op. cit., p. 120; Channing, op. cit., pp. 50-51, 205-6; Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 61; Coe, Founders of Our Country; Halleck and Frantz, op. cit., p. 388; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., pp. 178-79, 187-88; Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 250; Barnes, op. cit., p. 247; Thompson, First Book in United States History, p. 244; Hart, School History of the United States, pp. 190-91; Halleck, op. cit., pp. 244-45; Home, op. cit., II, 58, 44; Evans, op. cit., pp. 248-51; Gordy, Stories of Later American History; Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., p. 173. 75 Such as the signers of the Declaration of Independence or a group of people like the Pilgrims and Puritans. 120 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS Following the Colonial and Revolutionary periods and pass- ing into that of nationality, aside from those mentioned in the preceding list, one meets frequently the names of Boone, Lewis and Clark, James Robertson, Sam Houston, and John C. Fre- mont, those pioneers of expansion, some of whom carried on their activities in the periods first treated.76 J. Q. Adams, Monroe, John Marshall, Jackson, Clay, Webster, and Calhoun are given considerable attention in the period before the fifties, Jackson undoubtedly receiving the greatest amount of space. The heroes of the War of 1812 and those of the Mexican War are men- tioned elsewhere in this study. Garrison, Douglas, John Brown, Davis, and Seward, besides the presidents, are accorded attention in most histories. Lincoln and the military heroes of the Civil War, particularly Grant and Lee, are found appearing most often in the period of the Civil War. In our more recent his- tory, Dewey and Pershing are outstanding military heroes, where- as, among civilian leaders of various interests, there is an oc- casional mention of Edison, John Hay, Elihu Root, and Gifford Pinchot. Roosevelt and Wilson, Cleveland and McKinley are the outstanding presidents so far as attention in the textbooks is concerned. Other persons, of course, are mentioned, but not by all histories. Nor are these persons named the only significant personages. They are those whose contributions receive the most space or the most eulogy, taking, in the mass, the histories re- viewed. Men whose work has been that of the chief executive are mentioned in all books. The qualities most often held worthy of emulation are those of service to country, either by defending it in time of war or by offering some constructive idea as to the settlement of diffi- culties, the formulation of political concepts into a political faith for the people, and unusual leadership in statecraft. Wash- ington may typify the first; Wilson, the second; Jefferson, the third; and Roosevelt, the fourth. Assuming that the heroic characters most frequently intro- duced into the great majority of histories are those held to have 76 See, for example, Gordy, Stories of Later American History; Fish, op. cit.; Daffan, op. cit.; Mace, Primary History of the United States. THE AMERICAN 121 made the highest contribution to the country's history, pupils can readily gather that the greatest patriots are the military forces of the country and the leaders of political thought and action. This same point of view can be gained from a passage such as the following, taken from a textbook for the grades which assures readers that "loyalty and cheerful willingness to serve one's country is the duty of all who are within the limits of military age."77 An assertion such as this, abetted by the use of colorful and eulogistic adjectives describing the exploits and achievements of heroic characters set in this frame, can easily establish definite concepts. Although some of our histories speak of war as "a cruel thing at best"78 and urge the settlement of differences between nations by peaceful means,79 yet other books are at times advocates of preparedness, declaring that lack of it prolongs a war.80 West, for example, points out that "the cost of war is measured first of all in human lives ; then in money and property destroyed. The bitterest cost cannot be measured. It is paid in the bad habits formed during long years in camp and barracks and on the battlefield and in the spirit of fear and vengeance which follows war."81 On the other hand, according to Stephenson, We study the wars in which our country has been engaged, first, because the courage and self-sacrifice of our ancestors serve to in- 77 Barnes, Short American History, p. 372. 78 Evans, op. cit., p. 405. See also Barnes, American History for Gram- mar Grades, p. 172; Thompson, First Book in United States History, p. 399. 79 Ibid. See also Halleck, op. cit., p. 269; Elson, op. cit., p. 289; Barnes, Short American History for Grades, p. 328; Stephenson, op. cit., pp. 422-23; Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 461; Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 552; Gordy, History of the United States, pp. 420 ff. ; Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 384; Guitteau, op. cit., pp. 543-44; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, p. 419. 80 Thwaites and Kendall, op. cit., p. 578; Fish, op. cit., p. 475; Guitteau, op. cit., p. 485; Long, op. cit., p. 438; Burnham, The Making of Our Country, pp. 243, 248; Home, op. cit., II, 86, 88, 96, 371; Muzzey, op. cit., p. 434; Channing, A Students' History of the United States, p. 562; West, History of the American People, p. 636; O'Hara, A History of the United States, p. 225; Bourne and Benton, American History, p. 610. 81 West, The Story of Our Country, p. 395. The italics are in the original. 122 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS spire us with a like devotion to duty, even, if need be, to the laying down of our lives; and second, because they are precious lessons in how to defend ourselves.82 It has been mentioned elsewhere in this study that from a reading of the textbooks a child would gather the impression of the invincibility of the American forces in all struggles in which they have been engaged, and that a pupil could readily conclude from his study that the American soldier and sailor are not only more valorous but more generous than their foes. This impres- sion is easily gained when adjectives, commonly used in connection with wars, as well as other forms of speech, are considered. Ad- jectives such as glorious, brave, brilliant, strong, unconquerable, notable, and imperishable are frequently employed. Such state- ments as the following, taken at random from two histories, are cited merely to show how the phraseology of discussions is such as to inspire reverence in the pupils for the warlike undertakings of the United States : Next came the order to the Marine Brigade to capture Belleau Wood; and in the fight that followed, American marines proved them- selves the equal of the British at Ypres, of the Canadians at Mons, of the French themselves at Verdun .... the German defenders outnumbered our men by at least three or four to one. But the ma- rines never faltered (Guitteau, Our United States, p. 603). A few American vessels [in War of 1812], too weak to meet the enemy, were hidden in a sheltered harbor protected by land batteries. Suddenly appeared Oliver Perry, a young naval officer, with orders quickly to build enough ships to beat the British. His timber was then growing on the shore. He had asked for that job, had even sought it eagerly, because it is a tradition of the American navy to challenge the impossible. With incredible energy Perry built a squadron, launched it, and gave battle at Put-in-Bay. The British had six ships mounting 63 guns, the Americans nine with a total of 54 guns. A terrific fight it was, abounding in heroic incidents; the end was told in Perry's dispatch "We have met the enemy and they are ours, — two ships, two brigs, one schooner, one sloop." That is the only squadron that in the whole history of the British navy ever surrendered (Long, America, p. 264). 82 Stephenson, op. cit., p. 176. See p. 28, where this is previously quoted. THE AMERICAN 123 Recently this point of view was attacked by a member of the United States army, Lieutenant Colonel Thomas J. Dickson, at the annual convention of the Military Order of the World War. Colonel Dickson at that time issued a Critique on American School Histories, in which he criticized fifty-two American school textbooks for "serious errors of omission and commission," and declared that "some of these school histories are ridiculous, absurd and stupid !"8 According to Colonel Dickson, "unless our histories are immediately corrected, our pretensions, unwit- ting or otherwise, doom us to become the laughing stock of the world and endanger the peace of the nation."8 He holds this to be true because of an unfortunate use of military terms by persons lacking knowledge of their correct use, because of in- accurate statements regarding military events in the World War, because of the omission of certain significant military maneuvers, and because of false impressions as to the unvarying success of American forces. In regard to this last point, Colonel Dickson quotes as fol- lows from Mace and Bogardus' History of the United States: There (San Mihiel) 500,000 Americans met the best troops Ger- many had, captured 16,000 and went smashing through their lines. , . . . Over a million men in khaki fought like heroes for over a month. They drove the Germans reeling back toward the Rhine.85 Colonel Dickson exclaims: "Reeling back toward the Rhine !" The Germans contested every foot of ground from the Vauquois Mountain to Sedan. They made a masterful retreat. If the period of "reeling" covers time from turn of the tide to Armistice; they killed 44,000 American soldiers during this time. For weeks, while moving on Sedan, our battle deaths aver- aged 1,000 soldiers a day. Our soldiers did not wear khaki. We drove the enemy back; captured their trenches, but did not go "smashing through their lines."86 83 Thomas J. Dickson, Critique on American School Histories, New York; (Military Order of the World War, 1926). "Authors are advised not to attempt to use this critique in correcting school histories" is* a statement on the first page of the pamphlet. 84 Ibid., p. 1. 85 Ibid., p. 8. See Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., pp. 477-78. M Ibid. 124 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS From another textbook he quotes the following: The fighting at Belleau Wood, Chateau Thierry and in the Argonne Forest demonstrated that the American soldier with six months of training is more than a match for the German veteran. Lack of training on the part of our troops was overcome in large measure by native ingenuity, courage and skill. To this, Colonel Dickson says: Steady Clio! "By pride angels have fallen ere thy time." Q.E.D. Ideas like these when believed by children make work for the Graves Registration Service. As a veteran of three wars I have seen the flower of America fade three times and enough money spent to pave with concrete every road in the United States. Same old story. Un- prepared !87 Of the school histories analyzed for this study, Colonel Dick- son criticizes Thompson's History of the People of the United States, Woodburn and Moran's Elementary American History and Government, Estill's Beginner's History of Our Country, Gordy's History of the United States, Daffan's History of the United States, Long's America, Hall, Smither, and Ousley's A History of the United States, Home's The Story of Our Ameri- can People, Forman's Advanced American History, Fish's His- tory of America, Mace and Bogardus' History of the United States, Bourne and Benton's American History, Halleck's His- tory of Our Country, Guitteau's Our United States, Burnham's The Making of Our Country, and Fite's History of the United States. But each nation engages in self-praise and asserts its su- periority to other peoples in all lines of endeavor. Above all, the United States, like other nations, ascribes peaceful inclina- tions to itself and denies any militaristic tendency.88 "Always a peace-loving nation," declare Garner and Henson, "the United 87 Ibid., p. 10. The quotation is from Guitteau, op. cit., pp. 595-96. 88 See Jonathan French Scott, The Menace of Nationalism in Education (New York, 1926). This is a study of a few textbooks in European countries. THE AMERICAN 125 States has not imitated the European powers by keeping a large standing army or requiring compulsory military service."89 So far as a feeling of superiority over other peoples is con- cerned, the Baker-Thorndike Seventh Reader explains it in this way: Every country is inclined to look with pride on its own especial achievements and often to think of them as greater than they really are. We Americans have been called boastful; and it must be ad- mitted that, in our satisfaction with what we have done, we have often overlooked the big deeds of other nations. Still, it may easily be shown that we have played a big part in developing the civiliza- tion of our own time. Our representative system is the oldest in the world, and, no country has more safety, more freedom, more opportu- nities for its people. We have won the good will of other nations by fair and generous dealing with them. Our sense of the nation's honor does not lie in settling our heels on the necks of other people; we think it more honorable to treat them fairly We have grown rich, but we have been generous with our wealth In operations that require courage, energy and big planning, America has a fine record 9 Just what the reactions are to such narratives possibly can- not be measured to any accurate degree. However, to determine the meaning of such abstractions as patriotism and loyalty to children, the following questions were asked of 1,125 children ranging from the seventh grade through the senior year of high school: "What is patriotism?" "How can you show your loyalty to your country?" "Have you, through a study of history, gained a liking or a dislike for any country?" The questions were asked children in schools of the states of Pennsylvania and Iowa, commonwealths of distinctly different interests. The average age of the seventh grade was twelve years ; of the eighth, thirteen years ; of the ninth, fourteen years ; of the 89 Garner and Henson, op. cit., p. 631. See also Mace and Bogardus, op. cit., p. 475; Guitteau, op. cit., pp. 571-72; West, The Story of Our Country, p. 472; Thompson, History of the People of the United States, pp. 502-3. 90 This citation properly falls in the section devoted to readers, but is used here to illustrate the point raised. 126 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS tenth, fifteen years ; of the eleventh, sixteen years, and of the twelfth, seventeen years. Since patriotism and loyalty seemed synonymous to the pupils, the first question is not considered to any extent. The answers fall into these general categories: Defense of country or service to one's country in time of war and honoring the flag, obedience to the law, voting, celebrating national holidays, and honoring "patriotic" men and officials, and paying taxes. In addition, many answers of an individualistic nature came, such as "keeping healthy," "serving on the jury," "being loyal to one's fellowmen," "objecting to the formation of secret organizations seeking to destroy the government," "not speaking against your own gov- ernment," and "making others respect the United States." De- fense of country and service to one's homeland, obedience to the law, and voting appear the most often, with "honoring officials" and "paying taxes" following. Defense of country, since it is found most often, is made to represent 100 per cent. The comparative percentages will show how other "duties" are rated in the minds of the 1,125 children. PER CENT Defense of country 100 Obedience to law 79 Voting 12 Honoring officials 6 Paying taxes 4 In other words, defense of country appears approximately nine times more than the duty to exercise the suffrage, and twenty-five more times than paying taxes. Those holding "obedi- ence to law" the first attribute of loyalty to country are not far behind the number believing defense of country and honor owed to the country's flag the sine qua non of patriotism. It may not be inappropriate to repeat what one senior in one of the better schools of Iowa holds to be patriotism : Patriotism is a great thing. It means much to us. If you are loyal you are really in a way patriotic to your country. Loyalty and patriotism are very close relatives. One cannot very well live without the other. Respect your flag and all legal holidays. It may be that THE AMERICAN 127 many people do not fully realize the significance of the Armistice. The world was at war, and then it became more peaceful. The nations were put at rest. Just think of the lives that were sacrificed for us. We should honor our soldier boys and sailors and marines. Think what they did for us; the hardships they went through. On any Patriotic Holiday just stop and think who and what has been sacri- ficed for us. Other answers such as the following are typical: "One can show there [sic] love or loyalty to there [sic], country by respecting the laws or the constitution, by raising [sic] when the national anthem is being sung, by being ready to go to war if at any time they may be called. Always having in mind the good one can do in time of war — both men and women."91 "Patriotism is the manner in which you support your country by abiding with its laws and always being ready to preserve, protect and defend it. Patriotism even goes so far as to be ready to die loyally [sic] for your country."92 The influences of the World War still are present if one judge by the answer of a Pennsylvania girl of sixteen, who says: "You can show your loyalty to your country by helping it in time of need. This does not mean that you must take arms and fight, but does mean that you support the government and the army. This could easily be done in the World War by securing liberty loans." In the replies received to the question as to whether they had gained a liking or a dislike for any country through historical study, the pupils expressed themselves, in a few cases, as not believing that their animosities had been engendered by instruc- tion in this subject. Some pointed out that history should teach that "there is good in every nation," five pupils writing that his- tory should aid pupils "to see both sides to a national or in- ternational question." One child declared that "history fosters a love of your own country," another expressing the same thought held, however, that "love of one's native land is natural" — a belief with which few would quarrel. One boy pointed out that "there 91 Written by a Pennsylvania girl, seventeen years old, junior in high school. 92 Written by a Pennsylvania boy, fifteen years of age, in the tenth grade. 128 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS is good in every nation," and one girl indicated her attitude to- ward Germany thus : Through my study of history I have to a certain extent overcome a hatred for Germany. By studying history and in this manner learning Germany's side of the question it has reconciled me to a certain extent to think that Germany is not as black as she was painted by the nations engaged in the World War. I realize that she was greety [sic] but all nations have their good and bad points and we must look up to her for her splendid organization [sic] and training.93 Yet most of the pupils expressed an admiration for, or a hostility toward, different countries. Austria received no favor- able comments, whereas Belgium stands in sharp contrast to the hostility expressed toward Austria characterized as "one of the countries which made the World War." Approximately the same number liked England as those who did not, the reasons for ap- proval arising from the fact that she has "good type of citi- zens," "great statesmen," and is "the mother country of Amer- ica." Those stating their dislike for England, when giving rea- sons, asserted that she "wanted to stop American growth," that she is a "selfish" and "overbearing" nation, and "grasps at some- thing not belonging to them," that she is "unwilling to give the United States credit for her part in the World War," and be- cause of "her treatment of the thirteen colonies." Over eight times as many students avowed their liking and admiration for France as those confessing an unfriendly atti- tude. In the latter case the feeling arose, when a reason was given, from a "hatred of Napoleon" and because France had been "intolerant" in religious matters. On the other hand, France is liked because the French are "a peaceful, courageous, patriotic people," because "they helped the United States when in danger," because they have fine architecture and an appreciation of the arts, and because they "like the United States." Germany presents about the same ratio as France, only in reverse order. As one might expect, dislike for Germany has been engendered by the fact that she "brought about the World War," 93 Written by a girl, a junior in high school in Pennsylvania, age seventeen. THE AMERICAN 129 because of her "treatment of Belgium," "her cruelty to women and children," because she is "against world peace," because she "killed American Buddies," because "she is not trustworthy," and because she is "a shelter of barbarism." The students expressing an admiration for Germany, when stating their reasons, declared that the German people were not responsible for all the govern- ment did, for "the people were under a tyranny," and that, in some cases, our "dislikes are based on unsound suspicions." Ad- miration was also expressed for Germany's ability at organiza- tion. Few pupils expressed a liking or admiration for Mexico, Rus- sia, or Turkey. Holland, Switzerland, South America, arid Can- ada are generally "liked," in the last two cases commercial con- tacts being mentioned as desirable. Spain, Japan, China, Greece, and Italy are held about equal, so far as preferences or expres- sions of disapproval are concerned. In a few cases, "liking" was mentioned for the countries of Holland, Norway and Sweden, Poland, and Ireland. A liking for their own country was attested to by many be- cause there is "more freedom here" than elsewhere; there are "better morals in this country" ; we have a "better government," "better schools," and "better churches"; because of "the battles fought and won" ; because "we help other countries" ; because of "the honesty and truth of the United States in the World War" ; because we are a "peaceful" people, and "always have done the right thing" ; "the best country of all" ; and because "America started so small and grew so large and great." Only four pupils out of the entire number confessed that the United States "has carried on some enterprises which we can't be proud of." One other pupil objected to the attitude during Washing- ton's administration taken toward France in "a time of need." A few others suggested indirectly that all nations are subject to changes in policy, and that the United States may not be immune from this immutable law. In summarizing the attitudes which may be acquired from reading the history textbooks and which are obviously generally 130 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS subscribed to, the following quotation is given as setting forth a commonly accepted fact. Every American feels a just pride in the achievement of our coun- try. Beginning with a little straggling group of states along the Atlantic seaboard, we have pushed on step by step conquering and civilizing the wilderness as we went until we reached our ocean boundaries on the west, and then reached out to the islands of the sea. From a little weak federation of states we have built up a strong nation of united section [s] bound together by common interests, com- mon ideals and a common patriotism. Finally, we have developed into one of the foremost powers of the world. We have made a nation of many races, and these have been blended together into one type, the vigorous, aggressive, resourceful American. The very corner- stone of American liberty and government is a belief in the rule of the people, and with the growth of territory has gone the spread and development of democracy Our political ideals we have passed on to other nations, and we have fought a war to make the world safe for the democracy which we have created and to aid the oppressed peoples of the earth To this end [a continuation of American principles] we [the authors of the textbook] appeal to the courageous patriotism of the student readers of this history soon to come into responsible citizen- ship, and upon them we invoke the guidance and blessing of the God of our fathers. I love thine inland seas, Thy groves and giant trees, Thy rolling plains; Thy rivers mighty sweep, Thy mystic canons deep, Thy mountains wild and steep, All thy domains. Thy silver eastern strands, Thy Golden Gate that stands Afront the west; Thy flowery Southland fair, Thy sweet and crystal air — O Land beyond compare, I love thee best.94 04 Hall, Smither, and Ousley, op. cit., pp. 524-25. CHAPTER XIII INTERNATIONAL ATTITUDES IN SOME EUROPEAN HISTORY TEXTBOOKS Not only do textbooks in American history contain statements which will form opinions as to the achievements of different na- tions and peoples, but textbooks in European history carry in- formation of a similar nature. To determine the general characterizations found in European histories, four books were selected for analysis : Hayes and Moon's Modern History, West's World Progress, Elson's Modern Times and the Living Past, and McNeal's Modern Europe and Its Be- ginnings. The last book was chosen because it has but recently come from the press, the others are found frequently in approved lists. Discussions relating to events beginning approximately with the eighteenth century and continuing to the present form the basis of comparisons. Obviously most of the material deals with European conditions and events, not much attention being di- rected toward affairs purely American. To be comprehensive, the part of the study dealing with this aspect of the subject doubtless should have included more books, but it is hoped that the histories selected contain typical material representing the most recent points of view. There is little criticism of American policy as it relates to our dealings with other nations, the authors usually leaving the im- pression that American achievements and American intercourse with other powers are praiseworthy. West, in World Progress, however, essays to question the American attitude in the War of 1812, and ventures to criticize American politics in 1920, the latter being quite colorless.1 Austria, on the whole, is not described in a way to inculcate in the pupil a favorable attitude toward that country. It is 1West, World Progress, pp. 441, 661. 131 132 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS made a country addicted to repressive measures, a country lack- ing in democratic ideals, and the home of the autocratic and merciless Metternich. In 1756, it is said for example, that "Aus- tria began a war of revenge."2 The reader of Elson is informed: The Italian rebellion against tyranny began in Sicily and Naples in January, 1848, even before the revolution in France. The im- becile tyrant on the throne was quickly frightened into granting a constitution. Then came the news of the revolt in France and the flight of the hated Metternich from Vienna. Instantly the whole Italian peninsula was aflame with revolution. Venice and Lombardy expelled the Austrian garrisons and declared for independence. Their oppression had been galling. Austrian spies and secret police were everywhere. Political discussion was forbidden. There was a tax on every bakery and every market. Venice and Lombardy constituted but one eighth of the population of the Austrian Empire, but paid one fourth of the taxes. Calling on the rest of Italy for help, they were joined by Charles Albert, king of Sardinia It was a great national uprising for liberty. Everything seemed to promise a steady release from Austrian tyranny The report that Metternich had fallen caused a wave of rejoicing over Germany, for the Germans also were the victims of his heavy hand 3 Metternich and the Austrians are pictured by Hayes and Moon also as exemplars of autocracy. In speaking of the Quad- ruple Alliance, they assert that "the world was to be made safe for autocracy and Austria. There was to be peace without lib- erty."* In the treaties of 1815, both Austria and Prussia are described by McNeal as opposed to popular movements for lib- eral government as well as to nationalist impulses among the German and Italian peoples.5 Adjectives such as "repressive," as applied to Austria's measures, tend to give the same impres- sion.6 Her ambitions for an expansion of territory are set forth in discussions such as those relating to the Balkan countries.7 •Ibid., p. 398. 3 Elson, Modern Times and the Living Past, pp. 542-43. 4 Hayes and Moon, Modern History, p. 435. 5 McNeal, Modern Europe and Its Beginnings, p. 293. 8 Ibid., p. 297. JIbid., p. 345. INTERNATIONAL ATTITUDES 133 It is a commonplace that Austria is made to share no small re- sponsibility for the World War.8 Germany fares scarcely better than Austria. Such terms as "Prussianizing" and "Prussianization" carry significant connota- tions. "Die Wacht am Rhein" and "Deutschland iiber Alles" still bring to the readers' mind much of the World War propaganda.9 Militarism and Bismarckian methods do not fail of attention, nor is Prussia cleared of charges of perfidy and unfounded claims to territory.10 And surely there can be no doubt in the pupil's mind, after a perusal of textbooks in history, as to Germany's guilt in the World War.11 Hayes and Moon, however, in their discussion declare: Because the diplomatic negotiations leading to the war had been conducted in secrecy, no one at the beginning knew for certain who were the guilty nations. The Germans and Austrians blamed Russia and England. The Allies blamed the German Emperor. As a rule, the common people in each country were willing to believe that their own government was innocent and their enemies guilty. Later on many of the facts were revealed and the evidence showed that the Austrian Government, with German consent, deliberately planned to crush Serbia; but it still remained doubtful whether they desired to start a war among the Great Powers. It was also shown that some of the Russian military leaders did their best to bring about the war. The whole truth is not yet known and probably will not be known for many years to come.12 Yet as a foe to world-peace, Germany is shown as holding an "implacable opposition" due to her militarism.13 Her methods of carrying on war likewise receive denunciation, poisonous gas, for example, being described as "a devilish device," and the use of the submarine as a token of "German frightfulness."14 As slbid., p. 391. Other textbooks would hold the same point of view. 9 Ibid., pp. 295, 296. 10McNeal, op. cit., pp. 309, 310; West, op. cit., pp. 451, 504, 566, 567; Elson, op. cit., pp. 554, 575, 649; Hayes and Moon, op. cit., pp. 204, 205, 211, 480, 538, 542, 547. "Elson, op. cit., p. 650; McNeal, op. cit., p. 391; West, op. cit., p. 629. 12 Hayes and Moon, op. cit., p. 717. "West, op. cit., pp. 619, 626, 629. id., pp. 633, 636; McNeal, op. cit., p. 398; Elson, op. cit., pp. 673, 675. CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS for the traditional treatment of the violation of Belgium's neu- trality, there is still evidence of its popularity among textbook writers.15 France, moreover, is not so consistently apotheosized as in American histories, for Napoleon is given considerable attention, and his methods are not more favorably dealt with than are those of Metternich and Bismarck.16 Yet the picture drawn of France's activities from the eighteenth century to the present is not so gory as that of her neighbor at the east, and the reader is told that "French culture and French civilization have remained to our own day the standards of culture and civilization of Europe, even of the world."17 In regard to Russia, there is little to commend to the pupils reading these textbooks, unless a feeling of sympathy kindled for the lower classes can do so. A "barbarous, brutal despotism,"1 backward in cultural progress and in industry,19 czarist Russia is left accused of "tyranny,"20 of being devoid of liberalism,21 and of ambitious designs on territory not legally hers.22 Russia's in- fluence in causing a World War in 1914 is noted by McNeal and Hayes and Moon. Bolshevist Russia is described as having a government resting upon "confiscation, terror and dictatorship of the lower classes," brought about by "violence and bloodshed, and the disorganization of industry and decline in production."2 Turkey fares no better, for the "unspeakable Turk" is char- acterized as "fanatical," "cruel and oppressive."24 His "reduc- tion to impotence," according to Elson, "must be pronounced "one of the most gratifying results of the World War."25 "Elson, op. cit., p. 653; West, op. cit., p. 629; Hayes and Moon, op. cit., pp. 716, 722; McNeal, op. cit., p. 395. "Elson, op. cit., pp. 484, 485; West, op. cit., p. 449; McNeal, op. cit., p. 245. "Hayes and Moon, op. cit., p. 465. 18 Ibid., p. 180. 21West, op. cit., p. 589. ™Ibid., pp. 178, 179. "McNeal, op. cit., p. 345. 20 Elson, op. cit., p. 459. 23 Ibid., p. 417. 24 McNeal, op. cit., p. 349; West, op. cit., p. 568; Elson, op. cit., pp. 619, 621; Hayes and Moon, op. cit., pp. 554, 676. 25 Elson, op. cit., p. 719. INTERNATIONAL ATTITUDES 135 England is not accorded the place of archtraitor to demo- cratic principles which she appears to hold in some American histories. Rather she is described as that exponent of democracy who successfully opposed Napoleon,26 and who came "to be re- garded all over the civilized world as the most liberal and pro- gressive of nations."27 Yet she is pictured as doing her "utmost to stamp out Irish nationalism,"28 although her colonial govern- ment is generally conceded wise in conduct and of benefit to her colonists.29 Attributes of kindness and generosity to smaller na- tions30 stand in contrast to those qualities which are ascribed by writers to her in her imperialistic adventures.31 As the ally of the United States in the World War, her "superb navy" and "heroic army"32 struggled with American forces in the "war for democracy." Naturally the events chronicled in these textbooks take on a different color for the American school pupil than those discussed in United States histories, for they are often remote from his experience. Events in American histories involv- ing Anglo-American contacts naturally touch, for the most part, upon incidents close to American patriotic sentiment and involve matters of a controversial nature in which the United States has been a participant. 26 West, op. cit., p. 449. 27 Hayes and Moon, op. cit., pp. 264, 266; Elson, op. cit., p. 518. 28 Hayes and Moon, op. cit., p. 638. 29 Elson, op. cit., pp. 429, 593, 600; West, op. cit., p. 537. 30 Ibid., p. 568. 31Ibid., p. 608. 32 Ibid., p. 632. PART II TEXTBOOKS IN CIVICS, IN SOCIOLOGY, IN ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL PROBLEMS CHAPTER XIV THE AMERICAN CITIZEN: HIS RIGHTS AND DUTIES The American of today is conscious that his natal heritage includes certain well-known and prescribed political ideas through which a form of government has been evolved that offers to him protection of life, liberty, and property. Within this conscious- ness he also holds the instruction of his tender years which taught him an avalanche of responsibilities and duties as a fair return for the protection given. Not only do history textbooks teach this, but even more so do books on government. The whole sub- ject of government in the schools is charged with the duties and responsibilities of citizenship. "A citizen," declare Woodburn and Moran, "is a member of the nation who owes the nation allegiance and is entitled to its protection."1 Citizenship as held by Americans therefore "im- plies membership in a nation," according to Williamson. "A citizen owes allegiance to his government, and in return is en- titled to the fundamental advantages of organized government, such as the protection of life, liberty and property at home and abroad."2 Yet "citizenship does not consist merely of boasting or receiving benefits ; it calls for accepting responsibility and for service to one's fellow men It not only brings privileges, but carries obligations," says Hughes.3 In the fulfilment of these obligations, Williamson avers, much depends upon the extent to which each of us assumes the re- sponsibilities of citizenship. Those who have gone before us con- quered a wilderness, expanded and preserved the Union. But it is not for us complacently to accept the result. Much has been done, 1 Woodburn and Moran, The Citizen and the Republic, p. 1. 2 Williamson, Problems in American Democracy, p. 341. See also Ziegler and Jacquette, Our Community, p. 19. 3 Hughes, New Community Civics, pp. 269, 281. See also Gettell, The Constitution of the United States, p. 76. 139 140 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS but more remains to be done Without a high sense of per- sonal responsibility, coupled with an intelligent and consistent effort, we can never reach the high goal admittedly possible.4 In order to attain "the high goal" desired, pupils are admon- ished to "study their own government that they may be as well informed as the children of foreign nations," that they may know "its strength .... to support it, and that they should know its weakness that they may be able to strengthen it," in order that "it may continue to be the greatest government in the world."5 "It is the duty of every good citizen to know his country's history, to honor its flag, and to be true to its ideals," declare Munro and Ozanne.6 "The citizen who does not know his coun- try's past cannot properly understand its present nor can he properly contribute to its future."7 The boon and virtues of citizenship are, therefore, envisaged for the boy and girl as the highest possible attainment. "Citizen- ship," say Jenks and Smith, "is the highest and greatest gift of the nation."8 It is "one dignity to which every boy and girl is born, and which remains a life-long possession." The "greatest thing that any man can say is, that he is a citizen of the United States."9 The blessings of citizenship in the United States have been brought about, according to the textbooks, through organized government, whose purpose is "to promote the interests of each by promoting the interests of all."1 ' In other words, "govern- ment .... is our agent"11 in the advancement of "the safety and happiness of the people."12 Furthermore, government, it is said, is not a voluntary organization, but it has grown out of the 4 Williamson, op. cit., p. 40. 6 Brooks, Our Dual Government, pp. 17-18. 8 Munro and Ozanne, Social Civics, p. 83. See also Guitteau, Preparing for Citizenship, p. 229. 7 Munro, Current Problems in Citizenship, p. 72. 8 Jenks and Smith, We and Our Government, p. 77. 9 Guitteau, op. cit., p. 13. 10 Munro and Ozanne, op. cit., p. 70. 11 Jenks and Smith, op. cit., p. 18. 12 Munro, op. cit., p. 50. THE AMERICAN CITIZEN 141 necessities of everyday life and brings all within its scope under its control.13 Its purpose is primarily protecting "the whole body of its people against external aggression, against foreign in- vasion," as well as "maintaining the rights and liberties of its citizens," not only from foreign interference but from "injustice at the hands of one another."14 This is accomplished, authors say, by laws "which define the relations of individuals to one an- other, and of one group of individuals to other groups."15 The purpose of laws then, is "to bring about fair play for all, to keep people from doing things that interfere with the rights of oth- ers."16 although such restraint may mean restrictions upon the freedom of individuals.17 Back of the laws, under which we carry on our customary and daily tasks, is the Constitution of the United States, the pupil is told. And this is the fundamental law of the land, the "most precious document to which Americans are heirs."18 It is our "greatest charter of liberty." "Indeed, it might be called a charter of liberty for the world" is the opinion of Davis and McClure, who hold this view because "practically all civilized nations have adopted representative government modeled after "Lapp, Our America, pp. 10, 38. 14Munro and Ozanne, op. cit., pp. 70-71. See also Long, Government and the People, pp. 2-3; Binford and Graff, The Young American Citizen, p. 28; Turkington, Community Civics, pp. 76-78; Finch, Everyday Civics, pp. 45-46; Hepner, The Good Citizen, p. 22; Hughes, op. cit., pp. 83-84; Magmder, American Government in 1923, p. 1; Levis, Citizenship, p. 425; Ziegler and Jacquette, op. cit., p. 40; Davis and McClure, Our Government, pp. 1-2, 240; Beard, American Citizenship, p. 5; Morgan, Living and Working Together, p. 155; Brooks, op. cit., pp. 35-37; Dunn, Community Civics for City Schools, pp. 41-48; Hughes, Text-Book in Citizenship, pp. 519, 527. 15 Munro and Ozanne, op. cit., p. 71. 16 Levis, op. cit., p. 359. See also Ziegler and Jacquette, op. cit., p. 60; Dunn, op. cit., p. 49. 17 Reed, Loyal Citizenship, p. 4 ; Lansing and Jones, Government in State and Nation, p. 3; Guitteau, op. cit., p. 42; Jenks and Smith, op. cit., p. 17; Turkington, My Country, pp. 193, 195-96; Hepner, op. cit., pp. 24-25; Hughes, Text-Book in Citizenship, p. 582; Levis, op. cit., p. 119; Ames and Eldred, Community Civics, pp. 154-55, 232. 18 Hayes, American Democracy, p. 89. See also Berry and Howe, Actual Democracy, p. 38. 142 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS the American or English plan."19 Even statesmen of other coun- tries have accorded it high praise, Gladstone being quoted as saying that "the American Constitution is the most wonderful work ever struck off at any one time by the mind and purpose of man," and Bryce having said that "it ranks above every other written constitution for the intrinsic excellence of its scheme ; its adaptation to the circumstances of the people ; the simplicity, brevity, and precision of its language; its judicious mixture of definition in principle with elasticity in details."2 Indeed, as "the oldest written constitution or complete instrument of gov- ernment in actual use,9'21 its excellence is seen in that "it works as well as ever today (although written in 1787), in what is truly a new world."22 The ideals expressed in the Constitution and insured thereby for the American people are those of freedom of speech, press, assembly, and petition, according to the textbooks. In addition to these rights are the privilege of trial by jury, no excessive bail, no excessive fines, no cruel punishments, no bill of attainder, no ex post facto law, the writ of habeas corpus, a speedy and public trial for accused persons; the provision that no person is twice in jeopardy for the same offense, and that homes are free from search and seizure except by a legal process, the same process being necessary for arrest, and the right of property.23 19 Davis and McClure, op. cit., pp. 57, 67. 20 Finch, op. cit., p. 199; Ames and Eldred, op. cit., p. 349. 21 Jenks and Smith, op. cit., p. 51. Italics in the original. See also Beard, op. cit., p. 37. 22 Rexford and Carson, TJie Constitution of Our Country, pp. 1, 3-4. 23Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., pp. 389-96. See also Ames and Eldred, op. cit., p. 66; Forman, The American Democracy, pp. 86-89, 244-46; Lapp, op. cit., pp. 44-45; Hepner, op. cit., pp. 70-72; Munro, op. cit., p. 70; Lansing and Jones, op. cit., pp. 6-7; Rexford and Carson, op. cit., pp. 4-6; Hughes, Economic Civics, p. 326; Magruder, op. cit., pp. 206-13; Beard, op. cit., pp. 35-36, 64-76, 54-58; Munro and Ozanne, op. cit., pp. 581-82; Dunn, op. cit., pp. 391-93; Reed, op. cit., pp. 25, 66-68, 139; Berry and Howe, op. cit., p. 47; Greenan and Meredith, Everyday Problems of American Democracy, pp. 85, 10; Levis, op. cit., pp. 433-36; Gettell, op. cit., p. 60; Bennion, THE AMERICAN CITIZEN 143 These rights, held fundamental to American liberty by the founders of the Constitution, are said to be the ideals upon which our government is based. In the polity of the American people, moreover, it is held are the "ideas of natural rights, popular sovereignty, right of resistance against tyranny, individual lib- erty, representative government and separation of powers."24 The Declaration of Independence, emphasizing the equality of all people, is believed by Woodburn and Moran to have re-created substantially the same ideals, many of which had been bequeathed to the colonists through English political documents such as the Magna Charta, the Bill of Rights, and the Petition of Right.25 One of the most significant of the political contributions made by the Declaration of Independence, according to authors of government textbooks, is the belief in the consent of the gov- erned, a belief that no government should carry on its functions without the sanction of the people.26 In connection with the pro- nouncement of a faith in the ability of the people to govern themselves as announced by the colonial fathers, there is mention in some of the textbooks also of the theory of natural rights and of social contract.27 Several authors indicate the significance in American politi- cal theory of such documents as the Mayflower Compact and papers of the era of the Revolution, in building the foundation of later American political development. The Mayflower Com- Citizenship, pp. 63-66; Ziegler and Jacquette, op. cit., pp. 51, 64; Hayes, op. cit., pp. 305-9; Morgan, op. cit., pp. 192, 34-35; Ashley, The New Civics, pp. 12-13, 134-38; Southworth, The Common Sense of the Constitution of the United States, pp. 91-93; Berry and Howe, op. cit., p. 63. 24 Gettell, op. cit., p. 60. 26 Woodburn and Moran, op. cit., pp. 386-88 ; Reed, op. cit., p. 9 ; Munro, op. cit., pp. 62-69; Finch, op. cit., pp. 184-86; Munro and Ozanne, op. cit., p. 323; Greenan and Meredith, op. cit., p. 3; Dunn, op. cit., p. 50; Lansing and Jones, op. cit., p. 31; Mavity, Responsible Citizenship, pp. 4-6; Lapp, op. cit., p. 156. 26 Hayes, op. cit., p. 86; Munro, op. cit., p. 48, and others. 27 Munro and Ozanne, op. cit., pp. 63-66; Munro, op. cit., pp. 61-62; Dole, The New American Citizen, pp. 123-24; Berry and Howe, op. cit., p. 32; Williamson, op. cit., p. 342; Greenan and Meredith, op. cit., p. 3. 144 CIVIC ATTITUDES IN TEXTBOOKS pact, according to Berry and Howe, affords "the first instance of a movement toward responsible self-government originating in America. It did not provide a form of government, but only pledged its signers to obey the government"28 Under the Com- pact, it is pointed out, was organized "a civil body politick,"29 designed to "our better ordering and preservation," through "just and equal laws" for "the general good."30 Thus, "We the people," as expressed in the preamble of the Constitution, is said to be the keynote of our democratic sys- tem and to attest the evolution through which government has passed from early English attempts at establishing the people's rights to the Constitutional Convention.31 A justification for investing the people with the power of governing themselves, according to Munro and Ozanne, "is that it insures, not necessarily the best government, or even good government; but the sort of government the people earn for themselves." In short, "it will reflect the intelligence, honesty, and patriotism of the governed."32 Yet by some authors democ- racy is not considered "suitable" to all peoples, for not all peo- ples have advanced to a high plane of civilization.33 But the United States presents an example where self-government has been successful because of its federal and republican character.34 Since the ultimate success of government is spiritual, text- 2S Berry and Howe, op. cit., p. 15. See also ibid., pp. 15, 24, for mention of other documents. 29 Hill, Community Life and Civic Problems, p. 433. 30 Rexford and Carson, op. cit., pp. 6-7. 31Ziegler and Jacquette, op. cit., pp. 16-17, 20, 180; Rexford and Carson, op. cit., frontispiece, also p. 63; Lansing and Jones, op. cit., p. 55; Greenan and Meredith, op. cit., p. 3; Levis, op. cit., pp. 426-27, 428, 369-70; Finch, op. cit., pp. 160-62; Hughes, Text-Book in Citizenship, pp. 17, 695, 708-9; Reed, op. cit., pp. 70-71; Dunn, op. cit., pp. 435-37. 33 Munro and Ozanne, op. cit., p. 70. 33 Greenan and Meredith, op. cit., pp. 3-4, 474-77, 5-67; Munro and Ozanne, op. cit., p. 70; Hughes, Economic Civics, p. 41. 34 Forman, op. cit., pp. 4-6; Beard, op. cit., p. 83; Hart, Social Life and Institutions, pp. 19-20, 253; Hughes, New Community Civics, pp. 157-58, 168; Mavity, op. cit., pp. 56-57; Hepner, op. cit., p. 295; Ames and Eldred, op. cit., p. 349. THE AMERICAN CITIZEN 145 books pay considerable attention to the necessity of an enlight- ened electorate, for "a sound education and a patriotic spirit are the twin foundations of good citizenship," government being "no better or no worse than the men and women who are respon- sible for it."35 Thus "the essence of democracy is government by public opinion," and "the kind of work the government un- dertakes and the way in which it does its work depend, in the ordinary course of events almost entirely upon public opinion; that is, upon what people think about political matters."3 Therefore, it is shown to be necessary for the intelligent and educated voter to exercise the suffrage in order to insure the welfare of this country, for "the vote is the most powerful thing in a republic, because the voters choose the men who govern us."37 This method of selecting officials is deemed the best meth- 35 Gettell, op. cit., p. 84. See also Davis and McClure, op. cit., pp. 188, 196-98; Munro, op. cit., p. 426; Ames and Eldred, op. cit., p. 36; Long, op. cit., pp. 255-56; Hill, op. cit., p. 53; Jenks and Smith, op. cit., pp. 120, 215; Ashley, op. cit., p. 269; Morgan, op. cit., p. 11; Dunn, op. cit., p. 131; Forman, op. cit., p. 371; Brooks, op. cit., p. 156; Hughes, Text-Book in Citizenship, pp. 34-35, 53, 124; Ziegler and Jacquette, op. cit., pp. 55-64; Gettell, op. cit., pp. 3-4; Williamson, op. cit., pp. 255-256; Greenan and Meredith, op. cit., p. 63; Hughes, Economic Civics, p. 168; Munro and Ozanne, op. cit., pp. 492-93; Hepner, op. cit., pp. 68-69; Lapp, op. cit., pp. 5T-59, 92-93; Mavity, o